We call on no-one to tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth

Personally, I do look at evidence. For example: Bill Clinton DID obstruct justice and was guilty of perjury. However my my feelings about what he did aside. He WAS guilty as charged.
As much I as a person I dislike Trump as an individual, every bit of his impeachment is on partisan leanings.
No one should be deemed guilty based on what another 'heard'. Doing this is nothing more than a reenactment of the Salem witch trials.
Again, don t care for the man, though do care about true justice...
I have more, would love to debate though this will be buried

Firstly, thank you for your thoughtful polite response.

Trump is clearly guilty of Obstruction of Congress, since Congress has the right of oversight. The problem wasn't a quibble of a document here and a document there, or denial of because of executive privilege of a certain testimony. It was an outright blanket refusal. This cannot stand, or else oversight doesn't exist anymore and we essentially have an elected king instead of a president.

I think Trump is also guilty of soliciting help from a foreign power to smear a political opponent. The evidence is in the transcript that he himself provided. This was a very strange transcript, not only for what was in it, but for what wasn't in it. Trump talked about nothing other than smearing Joe Biden, or that conspiracy theory about Ukrainians having the Democratic server. These are not only strange things to talk about, but it is strange that he didn't talk about anything else.

A quid pro quo is not necessary, but appears to also be the case, and the evidence of that is the very unusual halting of the money Congress had granted Ukraine as well as the timing of that. There was plenty of testimony about that in the hearings - the open ones that we all were able to watch on the news.

I also think Trump is guilty of Obstruction of Justice as detailed by Mueller in his report, but this was not an article that he was impeached for. I frankly don't understand why they left it out.

Okay, here is where I must disagree. Congress does have oversight of the executive branch of government.
However, these branches are co-equal per the constitution. As such, no branch can be held above another without the "stamp" (please forgive the abbreviation) or ok of another co-equal branch of government.
In the case of legislative vs executive branch it is the responsibility of the judiciary branch to determine obstruction of another branch