The distinction between “official” and “unofficial” becomes meaningless when a president can use their official powers to do illegal things that benefit themselves in an unofficial capacity. Hence the absurd conclusion that, apparently, a president cannot be prosecuted for assassinating their opponent using Seal Team 6.
Maybe, but does it follow that there's no protection for "official acts?" Go read some criminal statutes, and see what it would take for a creative red state prosecutor to pin something on Obama for ordering drone strikes killing American citizens. Or do you think Biden couldn't be charged with something in connection with his border policies?
Law enforcement has qualified immunity for the vast majority of what they do in an official capacity. That doesn't mean their testimony about what they do in an official capacity is inadmissible, including if they testify about what other law enforcement officers did.
To me, it's clear that there's {President-the-President} and {President-the-candidate}. Furthermore, campaign staff are explicitly not federal employees nor members of the executive branch.
What really needs to happen, and I believe what the Court was promoting the legislative branch to do, is for Congress to pass laws circumscribing Presidential authority specifically around elections.
In the form of can-do and can't-do.
