One of the things I am amused by in this Trial is how so many Trump worshippers etc., are A), Ignoring the context and B),Having a very poor notion of rhetoric, being a demagogue and plausible deniability.
I have read and I heard Trump's speech it is classic rhetorical demagoguery designed very clearly to get the mob riled up and angry and then set them loose. But at the same time the Demagogue wants to preserve plausible deniability so he / she doesn't quite say "go and attack X", instead he / she stokes emotions, uses inflamed rhetoric and "fighting words", an mouths the occasional platitude about being "peaceful" and goes right back to inflaming people. A classic example of this in literature is Mark Anthony's speech to the mob at Caesar's funeral in Julius Caesar. Anthony doesn't tell the mob to attack, kill or beat up the assassins of Caesar but his rhetoric is clearly designed to get a violent response from the mob.
Trump added those platitudes about being "peaceful" to give himself plausible deniability if things went wrong. Just like so many other Demagogues in history.
Of course the context of Trump's speech, (Two months of outrageous lying about a stolen election.), along with his lack of response during and after the riot along with his utter lack of contrition and continuing to push the stolen election lie indicate his responsibility.