Sadly true.
Although he didn't suffer from lack of name-recognition in the first place, so there are likely to be diminishing returns on that front.
And while yes, he's using it to play the martyr, he was doing that anyway, and will do that with any material - including the 2020 election.
For years I've been seeing articles along the lines of, "Oh but Trump will use X adverse event to gain popularity with his base," with a subtext of, "so maybe it would be better this one go."
But to think like that is to misunderstand The Former Guy. He doesn't behave like this because of event X; he behaves like this because he behaves like this; and if it isn't event X on which he seizes, it will be event Y.
Meanwhile he's more than happy to let other people believe they'd better just let him get away with X.
One of his biographers talked about this c2016. After a few weeks in The Former Guy's presence, he realised TFG operates by creating a permanent shitstorm of rule-breaking and outrageous transgression, so that no one can possibly call him out on all of it and people start picking their battles. Then TFG turns that round on people and says, "But you didn't complain when we did X, so you're complicit in X and can't now complain when we do Y."
TL;DR, there's no gain from not holding Trump to account for obvious major transgressions.