We're on the verge of a new year.

[MineralMan]

We're also still on the holiday break. Not much news about much of anything, really. Next Monday, however, we can begin to watch more closely to see what news breaks. I expect things to begin happening shortly after January 1, 2022. What things? Well, watch and see. That's what I'll be doing.

Keep an eye on this link, for example:

https://www.justice.gov/news

You'll be seeing news there before you see it in the news media. That's where they get the news. You can get it, too.

[gab13by13]

1. I can hardly wait,

DOJ will rule on Meadows. The select committee will hold public hearings that I hope Merrick Garland watches. Love watching Liz Cheney throwing out those not so subtle hints to Garland and before we know it Steve Kornacki will take over.

Plenty going on on New Year's Day, I get to watch college wrestling. Our family went out on Christmas eve to a fantastic steak house, but no plans for New Years.

[ShazzieB]

2. Thanks for the link!

I'm planning to start checking it regularly.

How I feel right now:

[gratuitous]

3. Just a few hours left for Trump to be re-installed as president

At least, that's what I've heard from the whack jobs and nitwits who support Trump.

[gab13by13]

4. Yeah, I wonder why the MSM,

didn't cover him flying in AF1?

[Gaugamela]

5. Agreed. We're about to watch some historic political theater, and I don't mean that in any

derogatory sense. Something on the order of the Catiline Conspiracy, but Garland won't make Cicero's mistake.

Maybe it's wishful thinking, but I'm beginning to wonder if the critics calling for Garland to act — Glenn Kirschner, Laurence Tribe, Claire McCaskill, and indirectly Liz Cheney — are all operating according to script. Their purpose is to set the stage, to raise awareness in the public of the potential gravity of the charges against Trump. The calls are there to counteract DOJ silence. If that's the case then I would expect to see an uptick in these calls for action before indictments are handed down. — Just a thought, and something to watch for. I'm not going all in on that one.

[MineralMan]

7. Yeah, maybe, but probably not.

A lot of those naysayers are also publicity-seekers to some or a large degree. I doubt they're being scripted by anyone.

I think, actually, that there is a lot of speculation by a lot of people who hope they are right and will be vindicated by actual things happening (or not happening.)

Silence from the DOJ may just be effective control of information being released. That has been sorely needed for a very long time. Further, that would fit right into Garland's style of leadership, I think.

The thing I look at with regard to that was the total surprise of Bannon's indictment. Nobody had a clue that was about to drop. I remember being quite surprised at the time. We knew there had been a Congressional referral, but we didn't know there were grand jury hearings. We found out when the indictment was issued.

That, to me, indicates a higher level of control over releases of information about ongoing investigations and other actions at the DOJ.

One thing is certain: We're going to find out. That's coming pretty darned soon now, I think.

I suspect there is timing already figured out, but kept tightly controlled. That's not a prediction. It's a conclusion I've come to, based on observation.

[uponit7771]

6. K&R, Me too ... the chances of "fuck it, let him die" from this nation is low to none IMHO

[MineralMan]

8. Yeah, I'm not envisioning that happening at all.