You have applied the wrong standard, your honor, and therefore you have drawn the wrong conclusion.
There is no dispute as to what was said. Not a single witness who heard the call disputed the transcript. The accusation requires we ascertain Trump’s state of mind, not just that people “heard” on the call. And only one person had a conversation with the President on this subject, so that one person is the sole fact witness. And his testimony about that call exonerates Trump.
And in correcting his testimony, he made it clear the things he said were his personal suppositions, not anything told directly to him by the President.
Now, do you want to impeach the witness because he was a Trump donor? Seems convenient to appeal to such rhetoric and have a beef with exclusionary rule at the same time.