I think he just doesn’t care if he breaks the law.
Do any of these high level politicians?
IMO? I don't think any of them do. But that is just my POV.
That isn't much of an answer, do you believe, he intended to violate the FEC rules, specifically concerning campaign finance?
Even the NYT admits, the case is quite flimsy. So, don't you think, making the accusation to some members, that they believe he is,
"above the law," is sort of. . . well, playing double standards?
Of these national politicians, whether they are Democrats, establishment Republicans, or this new group of demagogic MAGA politicians, they all believe the rules don't apply anymore, and really, for establishment pols, the rules never have.
SO, the question now becomes, why should the rules now, all of a sudden, apply to Trump, or any of the MAGA demagogue populist pols?

I'm as troubled by their fascist tendencies as you are, but if we don't enforce the law on Hillary, or Bush, or Joe Biden, why all of a sudden, is it fair game to enforce them on Trump?
Prosecutors Signal Criminal Charges for Trump Are Likely
The former president was told that he could appear before a Manhattan grand jury next week if he wishes to testify, a strong indication that an indictment could soon follow.
web.archive.org
". . .Even if Mr. Trump is indicted, convicting him or sending him to prison will be challenging. The case against the former president hinges on an untested and therefore risky legal theory involving a complex interplay of laws, all amounting to a low-level felony. If Mr. Trump were ultimately convicted, he would face a maximum sentence of four years, though prison time would not be mandatory.. . "
<snip>
". . In this case, that second crime could be a violation of New York State election law. While hush money is not inherently illegal, the prosecutors could argue that the $130,000 payout effectively became an improper donation to Mr. Trump’s campaign, under the theory that because the money silenced Ms. Daniels, it benefited his candidacy.
Combining the criminal charge with a violation of state election law would be a novel legal theory for any criminal case, let alone one against the former president, raising the possibility that a judge or appellate court could throw it out or reduce the felony charge to a misdemeanor.
This is not the first Manhattan grand jury to hear evidence about Mr. Trump. Before leaving office at the end of 2021, Mr. Bragg’s predecessor, Cyrus R. Vance Jr., had directed prosecutors to begin presenting evidence to an earlier grand jury. That potential case focused on the former president’s business practices, in particular whether he fraudulently inflated his net worth by billions of dollars in order to secure favorable terms on loans and other benefits.. . "
Doesn't the whole thing then, turn on intent? Was his intent to hide it from the voters, or his wife?
And do we, as a nation, wish to appear to have a balanced and fair justice system, or one that plays favorites to this party or candidate or that?
Comey: No evidence that Clinton acted with 'necessary criminal intent'
"I don't want to comment on people's public statements," Comey said in response to a question from Rep. Tim Walberg (R-Mich.).
www.politico.com