Link , Link , [Indeed, the absence of any emergency to justify departing from the longstanding rule is likely the reason that Barr has tried to pretend the default rule is exceedingly narrow. Rodgers, the former Deputy Chief Appellate Attorney for SDNY, explained the connection: There doesn’t seem to be anything related to Durham’s investigation of the public officials who commenced the Russia Investigation that would justify bringing charges before November’s election at this point. … Durham’s investigation appears to involve no allegations of ongoing criminal conduct, no victims suffering mounting losses, no likelihood of targets fleeing or evidence dissipating; in short, there are no circumstances that would justify bringing a politically explosive case less than two months before an election, except the obvious one of trying to help the President win that very election. Perhaps for that reason, Barr dissembles about the DOJ policy, claiming that it applies only when the target is a political candidate. This makes no sense at all. … The goal is to avoid impacting elections at all, not just to give candidates themselves a free pass from charges in the couple of months before they stand for office. Barr knows the true scope of the rule though he has tried to bury it. With so many Justice Department alums and now the broader legal community and public understanding the truth as well, the question is whether others in the department will violate their oaths and do lasting damage to their reputations by participating in Barr’s current course of action.]