The impeachment Chaos in Crazy

I am all for having witnesses and the right people testify at any trial. However, I only thought a president could be impeached by the House if he committed a crime. It is apparent the House impeached Trump without all the evidence otherwise they would not be trying to garner more witnesses in the Senate hearing. This tells me they convicted a president of a crime without presenting all the evidence and they are not confident what he did is a crime otherwise they would not more witnesses. I think this is dangerous precedent. What is to stop any House from impeaching any president based on flimsy evidence and hope the Senate can complete the job. This is wrong in so many ways. First, it says you are guilty until proven innocent and denies the president of many rights found in the constitution. Second, this type of behavior is divisive.

Right now, from everything I hear, every President can be impeached. For instance, the Obama Iran deal is a perfect example. In this deal, Obama moved unilaterally and signed a treaty with Iran including giving them billions in funding. Unlike Trump's constitutionally legal reason for withholding funds to Ukraine, Obama's deal violated the Constitution in many regards. First, money decision are to come from the house and second, Treaties have to be confirmed by the Senate. Sure, Obama violated the constitution but I am not going to say he deserved to be impeached for his actions. The proper action is to let SCOTUS decide the legalities and the correct separation of powers. It is the way things have been done for nearly 250 years