 How so? Kim Whaley is a legal analyst who followed this trial. Well, most of the activity that gave rise to that conviction on those 34 counts were before he was president, but there was evidence. Hope Hicks testified. He signed some of the checks to Michael Cohen out of the Oval Office, and the court does indicate that public communications get a presumption of immunity. So I do think there's some grounds for challenging the conviction. It's not automatic, though, that it would be prejudicial error that would require reversal.