An appointment of a replacement Vice President has to be confirmed by a majority of both the House and Senate (25th Amendment, section 2). There is some ambiguity in the 22nd amendment since it explicitly uses the word “elected” and some might argue an appointment is different. However, the counterargument is the 12th amendment with its eligibility language. Obviously there would be controversy and SCOTUS would be involved. While the RATs hold a slim majority, enough might be Constitutionally minded and hold to the spirit of the 25th to not vote to confirm. Either way, it becomes moot on Jan 3rd when the House goes Republican. No way in heck would they confirm Bubba to the Veepship.
Thank you, NonValueAdded. You are so right.
The XII Amendment says the VP must not be "ineligible to the office" of President, referencing Article II.
Article II eligibility criteria are 1) NBS, 2) 35 on inauguration day, 3) 14 years continuous US residence, immediately prior to inauguration.
Neither XII or XXII modifies "eligible to the office". I imagine the drafters of XXII were striking out at FDR, and they did not imagine that a fatherless degenerate could ever become President.
But WJC is, absolutely, "eligible to the office" of President, and hence VP as well - he just can't become POTUS again via election.