On Wednesday legal expert Phil Holloway provided a comprehensive analysis on the potential timeline and legal challenges facing the cases against former President Donald Trump, suggesting that it is highly unlikely they will proceed to trial before the upcoming election.

During a segment on Benny Johnson’s show, Holloway shared his expert insight into the complexities of the legal process, especially concerning high-profile cases involving significant figures like Trump.

Holloway began by addressing the overarching question of whether Trump would face trial before the election, firmly stating, “There’s no way on God’s green earth that’s going to happen!”

Holloway drew parallels with another case overseen by Fani Willis involving rapper Young Thug, highlighting the prolonged jury selection process due to the complexity of the case. Holloway said, “It took them over a year just to pick a jury. So if we started picking a jury today in the Trump-Rico case with all the defendants that are remaining, there’s no way the trial would start for probably two years.”


Furthermore, Holloway pointed out the likelihood of appellate intervention on several legal fronts, including the disqualification issue and motions to dismiss on First Amendment grounds.

“She’s saying things in that indictment like she’s calling the electors fraudulent and fake, and basically that’s putting the cart before the horse because these are conclusory statements that really should be left for a judge or a jury to decide.” According to Holloway, “The constitutional issues particularly should be appealed if the defense loses. Those should be appealed also pre-trial.”

Attorneys for a co-defendant in Trump’s Georgia case will be able to argue that District Attorney Willis overstepped her authority by bringing election-related racketeering charges against him, according to a new ruling.

District Judge Scott McAfee on Monday granted a certificate of immediate review for Harrison Lloyd, a former leader of the Black Voices for Trump coalition, allowing him to request a review by the Georgia Court of Appeals. The decision by McAfee is surprising because it conflicts with previous rulings quashing procedural motions meant to deny Willis from pursuing certain crimes.

In this instance, Judge McAfee was willing to entertain Lloyd’s argument that Willis’ “election-related” investigation was beyond her jurisdiction. He has previously argued that she “did not have authority to investigation or presentment authority to bring election-related charges against the Defendant absent a referral from the State Election Board,” according to filings obtained by Law & Crime.

McAfee first ruled in January that Willis had “concurrent jurisdiction” with the state’s election officials and did not need a referral from the secretary of state or any electoral body before pursuing charges. The Fulton County judge backed up his ruling a second time on appeal by Lloyd, but the latest motion seeking a certificate of review was enough to warrant consideration by an appeals court, he ruled.

The earlier decision to grant Willis jurisdiction is “of such importance to the case that immediate review should be had,” he wrote earlier this week.

The Georgia Court of Appeals must now explore whether Judge McAfee applied the law properly in areas where defense attorneys say in conflicts, granting a district attorney the power to pursue election-related charges without following the traditional steps required involving a grand jury.