If any part of Trump's speech is determined by a court to be
1) intended to cause violence.
2) reasonable expected to cause violence.
Then Trump is guilty of incitement. This is a fact. Do you accept it? It goes both ways. I accept the fact that if neither of these things is true, than Trump is innocent of incitement.
If you don't agree with the facts, then it is silly to go on.
If you accept this, then I will show you what Trump said that might count as incitement.
I would like you to say either "Yes, I agree with these facts" or "No, I don't agree with these facts".
No, I don't agree at all. For speech, specifically protected in the Constitution as a right, to be criminal, there has to be a direct solicitation to imminent violence. If the standard were that you couldn't tell people that their cause is just, they are true patriots, "don't let them get away with it," etc., then half of Washington would be in jail.
I still challenge you to tell me which statements Trump made may be criminal according to your standard. The left specializes in character assassintion by vague suggestions that they cannot and will not state specifically.