Jack Smith

Former President Donald Trump enters 2024 facing four criminal indictments, and one of them — special counsel Jack Smith's election interference case — is scheduled to go to trial in March. Many legal experts, however, are saying that a delay is likely.

Delaying his criminal trials has been a big part of Trump's legal strategy. But CNN's Katelyn Polantz, in an article published on January 2, reports that delaying is only part of Team Trump's game plan.

The man hired by Donald Trump to prove election fraud blasted his client Tuesday for continuing to push a “lie” that his research thoroughly disproved.

Ken Block’s company Simpatico Software Systems was contracted by Trump in November 2020 after the then-president first made claims that voter fraud caused his general election defeat.

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.

Donald Trump's latest and "boldest" defense yet against charges he plotted to delegitimize the results of the 2020 election isn't even close to being supported by the Constitution, The New York Times reported.

Next week, Trump is expected to argue before a federal appeals court that he's immune from prosecution for actions he took while president. But, as The Times points out, the U.S. Supreme Court has already acknowledged that the Constitution does not explicitly address whether Trump is immune.

A former Republican congressman predicted on New Year’s Day that Donald Trump will never face trial in Jack Smith’s election subversion case — but that the GOP will be scrambling to find a replacement for him as he drops out of the presidential race.

In a long list of predictions for the new year, ex-rep. John LeBoutillier (R-NY) took particular aim at the trial set to start on March 4 in Washington, D.C.

Although special counsel Jack Smith and Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis are both prosecuting election interference cases against former President Donald Trump, their criminal indictments differ in some important ways.

Willis, unlike Smith, is using RICO laws to prosecute Trump. And Willis has indicted a long list of Trump allies as co-defendants. Smith's election interference case, so far, doesn't have any indicted co-defendants — only unindicted alleged co-conspirators.

Former prosecutor and longtime legal analyst Harry Litman walked through the amicus brief filed by a group of conservatives and American Oversight, which cites the late Justice Antonin Scalia in a decision that could upend Donald Trump's desperation to delay his trial.

Taking to social media on Sunday after a follower asked him to explain it in simple terms, Litman said that the way Scalia wrote his majority decision would force Trump's appeals and delays to wait until after the trial is held.

Former federal prosecutor Harry Litman told MSNBC on Sunday that he expects the timeline for Donald Trump's "absolute immunity" claim to move quickly.

He began by saying that the appeals court is likely to strike down Trump's claim because the presidential immunity details that the action must be within the context of the job as president.

Appearing on MSNBC, former U.S. Attorney Carol Lam stated she didn't see the Supreme Court interested in stepping into the fight between Donald Trump and his lawyers with special counsel Jack Smith over whether the former president has wide-ranging immunity from being charged with crimes.

Reacting to a filing made by Smith on Saturday outlining the types of crimes a blanket immunity ruling could cover, Lam told MSNBC host Paola Ramos that she thinks the nation's highest court will let the D.C. Court of Appeals have the final word.

"What I think the Supreme Court may be thinking is, we are going to let the appellate court consider the issue first, and they've set a very expedited briefing and argument schedule for this," she began. "They're going to hear this argument in mid-January. So, if the Supreme Court or the majority of the Supreme Court fundamentally agrees with whatever the D.C. Circuit says, they may just decide not to take the case up in the Supreme Court, and just let the District of Columbia Appeals Court opinion stand."

"That way the Supreme Court will not have to actually render the ultimate decision on this case; they can just decline to take the case up and then they can leave for another day, deciding this particular issue as to the scope of presidential immunity," she continued. "But I do think that Jack Smith has the better argument because he's raised a number of potential scenarios that would be very problematic if a president could do anything he wanted with respect to trying to stay in office and could not be prosecuted for those things."

ALSO READ: Marjorie Taylor Greene has Jan. 6 anniversary plans

"I think that would be a very problematic position for the Supreme Court or even the D.C. Circuit to agree with," she added.

Watch below or at the link.