The “motivated by politics” unveiling is the underlying reason for making “knowingly false statements.”
They’re not distinct elements. The latter is the legal requirement and politics is the reason along with possible promises of money or gain for doing so.
You don’t have to prove the motive just that they made false statements and they knew they were doing so. The malice standard is required for public figures of which Donald Trump is one.
Right about “motive” which is not an element although, as you say, it can help support the malice element which requires intent or recklessness about the falsity.
However, the requirement for malice is not necessarily the public figure status of the plaintiff but is raised as a required element to prove defamation if the defendant raises a Constitutional first amendment defense.
So prudence says that Trump should be ready to prove malice in anticipation of such a defense. I don’t think malice would be hard for Trump to prove. Probably proving the falsity would be harder.