[analyzer] Implicitly tear off call from receiver whose type is a type variable

[eernstg]

This is the analyzer specific issue for #54351 which has the details.

[bwilkerson]

@scheglov

[scheglov]

class A {
  void call() {}
}

Function f<X extends A>(X x) => x;

We might not do rewrite to ImplicitCallReferenceImpl for => x.
IIRC, @srawlins started adding such rewrites, but we did not have time to do it everywhere.
I also will not have time to do this short term.