Trump’s rants against prosecutors a 'formulaic game' designed to halt trials: experts

Facing four criminal indictments and a variety of civil lawsuits, GOP presidential frontrunner Donald Trump has been furiously railing against both prosecutors and judges.

Trump slams special counsel Jack Smith as a "deranged lunatic" and has accused Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis and New York State Attorney General Letitia James (both of whom are Black) of being racist. Another target is Justice Arthur Engoron, the judge in James' civil fraud lawsuit against Trump and his Trump Organization.

Meanwhile, Trump is claiming that Smith's election interference case against him should be thrown out because he was still president in late 2020 and early 2021 and, therefore, enjoys "immunity" from prosecution — a claim that Judge Tanya Chutkan flatly rejected, ruling that presidents don't enjoy a "divine right of kings" in the United States.

In a report published by The Guardian on New Year's Day, some legal experts argue Trump's comments go way beyond being inflammatory — they are a full-fledged attack on the rule of law itself.

Attorney Ty Cobb, a former White House lawyer under Trump, told The Guardian, "Claiming the federal criminal cases or the Georgia RICO action are election interference, and railing constantly about the character of the prosecutors, judges and others, is just a formulaic game to Trump.

“Delay is his major strategic objective in all these cases. These criminal cases were started because of Trump's criminal acts and his refusal to allow the peaceful transfer of government for the first time in U.S. history. Trump's constitutional objections to the trial-related issues are all frivolous, including his claim of presidential immunity and double jeopardy."

Cobb describes Trump's actions in these cases as "authoritarianism in service of his narcissism."

Donald Ayer, who served as deputy U.S. attorney general under President George W. Bush, told The Guardian, "The reality is that Trump has clearly done a series of illegal things, and the system is holding him to account for things that he's done. He's telling more lies to mischaracterize prosecutions that we should be thankful for."

READ MORE: Mehdi Hasan explains the fatal flaw in a popular argument against barring Trump from the ballot

Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-MD), who served on the January 6 Select Committee, argues that Trump's praise of Russian President Vladimir Putin underscores his disdain for democracy and the rule of law.

Raskin told The Guardian, "Of course, it's true that Trump is the undisputed master of election interference, so he certainly knows the field. It's hard to think of a greater case of election interference than what Trump did in 2020 and 2021. His claim of election interference is meant to give him a kind of political immunity from the consequences of his criminal actions."

The Democratic lawmaker continued, "He's basically inviting the public to believe that the legal system's response to his stealing government documents or trying to overthrow an election are illegal attempts to interfere with his political career…. We know Putin is Trump's hero and effective cult master. So it makes sense that Trump would try to elevate him as a kind of moral arbiter. Trump would love a world where Vladimir Putin would decide the integrity of elections and prosecutions. Wouldn't that be nice for the autocrats?"

READ MORE: 'Increasingly erratic' Trump bitterly rails against ex-White House staffers: 'A weak and feeble man'