So what. None of those actions make an ineligible person magically eligible. If he's not eligible to the office, he cannot hold it.
The actions of the VP and Congress concern the votes, not the eligibility of the candidate. The Constitution doesn't require the Chief Justice, or anyone else to administer the oath, merely that it be taken before entering into the office. It's not a coronation ceremony, but it is a ceremony, not a Constitutionally significant action, except in so far as it satisfies one of the requirements laid out for being President. The counting of electoral college votes satisfies another group of requirements. Bu the bedrock requirement of being 35 or older and being a Natural Born Citizen still must be satisfied or the person is not and can never be President.
So if your theory is correct, we have usurper in office, not a President. Impeachment is for Presidents, not usurpers.
You are conveniently ignoring the Constitutional mechanisms for removing a President. No one on this planet, including you, can now declare him not to be President. Who would that be? The Supreme Court, the Congress, the Park Police, Simon? It can’t be done as a matter of law. The Senate, however, could act on an article of Impeachment delivered by the House stating that the President was ineligible for office and therefore should be removed. The Senate could hold a trial and remove him. I just don’t know of any other mechanism, including one that I have heard that suggested that it be done by the Joint Chiefs of Staff. That’s called a military Coup d’Etat and I don’t think that will happen.
What is the mechanism for removing usurpers, if not through impeachment?