Yes, like in 18 U.S. Code § 2102 that clears President Trump:
(b) As used in this chapter, the term “to incite a riot”, or “to organize, promote, encourage, participate in, or carry on a riot”, includes, but is not limited to, urging or instigating other persons to riot, but shall not be deemed to mean the mere oral or written (1) advocacy of ideas or (2) expression of belief, not involving advocacy of any act or acts of violence or assertion of the rightness of, or the right to commit, any such act or acts.President Trump spoke of his belief that he won the election, and then asked the attendees to peacefully walk to the Capitol to show the lawmakers their support for President Trump. That meets the exception to the "to incite a riot" definition.
The actual rioters who broke in the Capitol must defend their own actions, but US Code says that President Trump's actions did not incite these people to act.
According to this section of the US Code, President Trump's speech on January 6 didn't even meet the definition of incitement to riot. How can it then meet the definition of insurrection?
-PJ
Because they’re lying.