That's true. The evidence is entirely circumstantial. There is no evidence that Trump forced the accountant to treat it as a legal expense. I don't think this is a 100% slam dunk case. But I think it is pretty strong one. The jury would have to believe all of those things happened without his knowledge and involvement. Maybe. But a stretch. Imo. It wouldn't be crazy for some jurors to have reasonable doubts. But unlikely. Again imo.