The Second Article of impeachment is an unconstitutional fascist power grab by Democrats

The Second Article of impeachment the Democrats created says that the President can be thrown out of office if he doesn't do whatever the House wants him to do.

The specific claim is that by exercising executive privilege, something pretty much every modern President has done, Trump is "obstructing" Congress.

Of course the first problem is that according to the Constitution a President can only be impeached for a crime:

The President, Vice President and all civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors.

Obstructing Congress is not a crime.  After all Obama did everything he could, including effectively refusing to provide documents Congress wanted, to obstruct Republicans investigations into the many scandals that occurred during his administration.  Yet no Republican thought that he should be impeached.

That's because according to the Constitution Congress, the Supreme Court, and the Presidency are three co-equal branches of government.  That is intentional to prevent the establishment of a tyranny.

Democrats know that what Trump did, saying that certain executive branch employees didn't have to testify to Congress about the internal executive branch discussions they participated in, is perfectly legal. That's why the Democrat's didn't bother to try and have the Supreme Court decide if their interpretation of the Constitution, that Trump couldn't prevent the witnesses from testifying, was right or if Trump's interpretation, one shared by previous presidents, was right.  Democrats knew that odds were good that the Court would rule against them.

That is to say they knew that not only wasn't Trump guilty of any crime the very concept of his "obstructing" Congress was in fact fully Constitutional. But they didn't want you to know that they were trying to nullify the 2016 election by declaring that Trump following the Constitution was grounds for impeachment.

To make it clear how absurd this article of impeachment is let's look at another example of where Congress could declare that it was being obstructed.

Let's say that the Democrats controlled Congress and the Presidency and that they passed a law saying that because Republicans are racists they can't vote-- a leftist professor has already suggested this.  Then the Supreme Court rules that the law is unconstitutional.

Wouldn't that be the Supreme Court "obstructing" Congress?

Or what if the President wanted funding for something and Congress said no.  Could the President declare that Congress was "obstructing" the Executive Branch?

Clearly the idea of criminalizing the exercise of the Constitutional authority of the President is nothing less than a fascist grab for power by Democrats who would fight tooth and nail against Republicans declaring that Obama had obstructed Congress.

If Democrats really cared about the Constitution they'd have taken Trump to the Supreme Court.  If the Court had ruled for them and Trump still refused then Congress would have grounds for impeachment.  But they didn't because they don't care about the Constitution and they knew odds were they'd lose.

What Democrats are doing is precisely what the Framers condemned; saying that whatever party wins the House has veto power over whomever we the people can pick to be President.

Note that given that the Democrats have accepted this policy there is no reason that they couldn't impeach Pence and anyone else who they don't like until Pelosi ended up as President.

Democrats clearly want power over us by any means possible.