Hearsay. This is not evidenced by the parties involved, it's a third-party account. If the prosecution wanted to push that matter, they would've taken depositions from Trump and McCarthy. They did not call them to testify because they knew it was irrelevant to the charge of incitement. In fact, Trump could be clapping from the windows of the White House gleefully and that would not constitute incitement as the siege was *already in progress*. The idea that there's such a thing as "further incitement" is a red herring invented on the spot - in reality, either he incited the crowd and X happened or he didn't. His satisfaction or dissatisfaction with the event is immaterial when the question is whether he caused it or not. As for the phone call itself, it would be thrown out as irrelevant in a real criminal trial for the same reasons, in addition to one crucial detail - it was private and only leaked later by the press, after the fact. Nothing said during the phone call speaks to incitement as nobody in the crowd was aware of it taking place. The prosecution is wearing so many eggs on its face at this stage that if they stand in the sun for too long, they'll turn into an omlette.
