there will be no charges against Trump before the November election, citing the "policy" that such charges could be construed as "interference" with the campaign.  However, Trump is not running, so it makes no sense to worry about interfering in a campaign.  What Garland is really doing it biding his time.  If the Republicans take the House, there will never be ANY charges against Trump because Garland would be impeached.  He might be anyway.  He knows if he makes charges BEFORE the election, the red wave will turn into a Tsunami.  

That they need extra approvals for cases involving political figures in the weeks leading up to an election.

It said no NEW investigations can be begun without his permission.
So it has ZERO to do with the many investigations currently under way at the Federal level and ZERO to do with the investigation in Georgia.
Also, it makes clear (to everyone but you) that Garland can still, (based on the evidence) agree to open a NEW investigation.
Once again, your reading comprehension has been exposed as utterly pathetic.

something before the election.  That would rain hell down on the Democrat candidates.

the way they spin this on USA today, quoting their source as Rachel Maddow (Huh??!!), and the report I read.  The one I read didn't say anything about investigations, but said there would be no "charges" against Trump before the election, where yours doesn't mention anything about charges.  Maybe it's two different statements released by Garland.  Perhaps they don't want to tell the Democrat faithful that here will be no charges against Trump before the election.  It's a good thing that Rachel Maddow is so fucking credible and reliable, or I wouldn't know who to believe.   Bwahahahahahahaha

Even though it's the weakest apology I've ever seen.

by all the experts on this page.
   
experts in domestic politics
experts in law
experts in elections and polling
experts in foreign policy
experts in energy policy
experts in climate change science
experts in the medical field
experts in the stock market
experts in global economy
experts in warfare
   
or are most people are just talking out of their ass?

-- Modified on 7/20/2022 4:49:00 PM

...just as Garland did NOT announce that there will be "no charges against Trump before the November election" as CDL claims Garland said.

 
Former senator and federal prosecutor Doug Jones says Garland's memo is a reaffirmation of the policy that has been in existence for a long time under a number of presidents and attorneys general.

 
"Garland's memo simply says no one should open an investigation for the purpose of affecting an election.  That doesn't mean that everyone gets a get-out-of-jail-free card if they simply declare themselves a candidate for President.  The memo is also not saying that ongoing investigations come to a halt.  And it's standard practice to seek the Attorney General's approval if the charges will be against a high government official."  

 
http://twitter.com/i/broadcasts/1yNxaYNAgzDxj?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1549239206278418432%7Ctwgr%5E%7Ctwcon%5Es1_&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.usatoday.com%2Fstory%2Fnews%2Fpolitics%2F2022%2F07%2F19%2Fgarland-memo-trump-indictment-election%2F10097439002%2F

Obama wanted to make a Supreme Court Justice.  Can you imagine how his politics would be playing out there?