Intriguing essay. What is the commonly agreed to legal standard of proof for divining the mindset of a person in cases like these? Would Trump have a defense against that argument?
Usually, audio or video recordings, or documents (emails, tweets, paper letters) in which the suspect describes his mindset and motive.
For example, if there was a recording of Trump stating, "Well, we want to quiet these women down before the election -- this stuff might impact my chances..." that would be pretty damning material.