among other "no evidence" pronouncements by you in the past. I seem to remember absolute statements by you on other subjects as well.
I agree that testimony is evidence. Some testimonial evidence is trustworthy (whether under oath or not). Some is not. In the courts, some testimony is barred outright. Other testimony is allowed. The job of the decider of facts (in this case, the Senate, believe it or not, as a proxy for the people) is to decide which testimonial evidence is credible, and which testimonial evidence is not credible. But, any time anyone says that the evidence is not credible (as Trump did), you guys go off the deep end about respecting the accuser. You don't want to evaluate the credibility of the testimonial evidence.