Pike Ludwell

They need to have something involving Cuba and have Heller show a trend of going with presidential mispronunciations by calling it Cuber.

As to Chloe encountering a cougar, if this is to be the final 24 episode, the writers should go for it! Have some fun. It would be hilarious to long time 24 viewers. Then show the Veep as being Logan. Do all sorts of crazy 24-self-caricature stuff and have fun with it.

BTW, the Chinese do not actually have any fully operational aircraft carriers. They bought an old one in 1998 from Russia to restore to make into a casino, but the holding co. couldn't get the casino license from Macau, so China will use it for now as a testing place for scientific research until they get a competent crew, which could take 4 years. "All of the great nations in the world own aircraft carriers," said Qi Jianguo, assistant to the chief of the PLA's general staff. "They are symbols of a great power."

Although the Chinese were right to be pissed at the bombing of their ship, at a certain point they shift from innocent victim to irrational evil bully. After receiving the explanation from Heller and the British Prime Minister, they refused to take a cautious approach and instead veer ahead recklessly. This is when Heller justifiably upgraded the response status. If looking at intent and reality, at this point the U.S. was becoming an innocent victim of irrational Chinese aggression. My favorite line of the night from Jack: "He's a covert intelligence operative, you IDIOT." Love it when someone, especially Jack, justifiably calls someone an idiot.

How about Logan? He attempted suicide, shooting himself in the head, in Season 8. But I believe the paramedics said he'd live but be brain damaged. Well, maybe the brain damage wasn't so bad and he got a huge sympathy vote. Hey man, the "24" world is a crazy one! At any rate it would be hilarious. I'd love it if they like totally jumped the shark and made the remaining episodes into a sort of self parody, poking fun at its very preposterousness.

So, who is the VP who is now becoming President? I don't think they have shown or named him/her, but I could have blinked and missed it. Maybe it's someone from a previous season?, as was the case with Heller.

I've seen the speculation on this. But how could he possibly have survived that blast? We saw him standing there, we saw the blast hit where he was standing.

As to why Lester is pursuing Malvo in the previews, I believe Lester thinks Malvo must be pursuing him, so rather than run and always be worried, he wants to confront Malvo and see what's up. As to the Emmy awards, it will be very close between True Detective and Breaking Bad, but the latter will have more support and momentum and I think Cranston is more deserving, though McConaughey is excellent. Fargo and Martin Freeman will have a decent shot as long as those other two are in that different category.

Maybe Lester doesn't think it's a coincidence that Malvo is there, and he wants to confront him and see what this is all about. After all, his being there is rather far fetched. If that is the case Lester is acting rationally. However, it could be one of those unusual coincidences, like the African guy bumping into his foster father in the supermarket.

Unlike some of the other posters, I wasn't bored at all. If the first episode had moved like this, then that would be boring. But we are nearing the conclusion of this interesting story, so a slow build up of suspense like this works for me. You just know something important is going to happen soon, so just sit back and enjoy the suspense.

Re: Lorne's killing of Sam Hess as having Dexter overtones: I need to re-watch to check out my theory, but I'm thinking that Lorne did it in his own self interest as a manipulation to get the police onto Lester instead of him (and/or maybe for some even bigger manipulative purpose, lying ahead), and not a Dexter-like thing. He seats himself next to another guy (Lester) at the hospital with a head wound, learns his story and begins "operating". Notice he deliberately, kind of unnecessarily, says the name of Sam Hess so the nurse can hear it. It's the nurse's tip that puts the police onto Lester, as a suspect in both murders: Hess and the guy frozen under the tree. Of course Lorne had a head wound too, on the side visible to the nurse, so I don't know why she couldn't have reported him too. Guess she didn't see it. As to the blood on the steering wheel ... that could have been DNA tested, immediately absolving lester ... so, that pretty much shoots the theory down. Unless Lorne substituted deer blood for his own ... he'd planned out the scene so carefully. He doesn't seem so stupid as to leave his own blood there. So, who knows ... we'll see.

Not any sort of big deal. Very minor point in the overall scheme of the show.

If the point was that Diane didn't like her "look at me I'm sobbing" thing, that was still an emotional reason, if she would not act that way in those other sorts of situations. I applaud you for showing consistency and that it would be a consistent, rational policy you would apply. I would respect that. In fact, the bigger problem at work to me has always been the more frequent unprofessional noise makers. The sobbers at death don't bug me that much as it is a rare deal. A boss who would fire a constant annoying hallway loud laugher or person insisting on always talking on their phone through the speaker phone - that would be my hero. If Diane does that she is great. If this was just her going off half cocked out of personal resentment, I don't like it. I'd like to see a followup on another episode, but probably won't happen.

Unless you all believe that Diane should also fire new people instantly for laughing too loud in the halls, one must conclude that you folks here understand she was acting on personal feelings, not genuine business motives. Laughing loud and long in the hallway is unprofessional too and highly distracting, and childish. Those who do it are likely to repeat it over and over and over, unlike someone sobbing because a co-worker just died (co-workers die a lot less than laughter situations ensue). So, if you all are willing to instantly fire new employees for other childish loud noise, at least you are consistent, and I respect your opinions. But I doubt she would do so. On the other hand, if Diane is not willing to instantly fire people for things such as crazy loud laughter in the hall as well, we must conclude she was motivated by personal feelings, along the lines: "My grief for Will is special and precious since I knew him so well. I DO NOT want some B who hardly knew him to be publicly exhibiting greater grief than me!" That's it in a nutshell. Either admit that Diane should also instantly fire anyone new, making childish inappropriate noise in the hall - thereby showing she is truly just being professional. Or admit she was motivated in a specific instance by irrational personal feelings: Her grief was too special and precious to allow it to be upstaged by someone like that intern. So either applaud her for acting professional (in which case you must also advocate she instantly fire loud, long laughers) OR admit she was acting on emotional feelings, irrationally, but with a mindset of boy that felt good!

I remember on 9/11 there was a temp worker crying out loud in the distance, briefly, in very professional legal offices I worked at. I just viewed it as a reflection of strong feelings being expressed differently by different people. If a manager had walked up to her and fired her on the spot I would have been outraged. Additionally, here's another thought. I HATE people talking too loud, unnecessarily in the hallway. One time a temp worker was standing outside my office talking for a while on their cell phone. Very unprofessional. Should I storm up and fire him on the spot. Same thing as Diane did. To be consistent she will have to be firing anyone talking loud in the hallway, laughing too loud, etc. Would she do the same as to an intern laughing too loud? It's the exact equivalence: deliberate too loud emotion, very unprofessional, probably an element of attention seeking in it. Soon a boss like Diane would be so despised she would become a detriment to the co.

"Mentoring" the woman? Then quickly get her in private, see if any special reason for the hysteria, tell her to get it together and not show such a public display again. Maybe she'd just had both her parents killed in a car crash and this was more than she could take. Maybe she was secretly Will's lover. But to just assume she's a chronic drama queen or somesuch .... illogical. To instantly fire her .... way too harsh. It was a horrific circumstance and some degree of insanity is to be expected from people.

How did Diane know how well she knew Will, even if she'd worked there only a week. And then you go on to project personality traits onto her as to her motives. And even if she was over emotional, it's possibly a one-time deal. If somehow she repeats that sort of thing talk to her and give her notice. Don't act harsh based on pet peeves and jumping to conclusions and possibly overgeneralizing as to peoples personalities. It's fun to act harsh based on pet peeves, but it reflects poorly on her personality.

Deserved in the sense of someone (Diane) overharshly acting out their own pet peeves, so viewers with the same pet peeves applaud. But the intern might have had very sincere anguish. Diane didn't know. She was just apparently annoyed due to her dislike of such public displays. The intern might never act that way again in the likely scenario that no key person around her at work dies suddenly. I realize many support Diane on this and they applaud her acting on their own pet peeves, and they project all sorts of personality aspects onto the intern, and they feel very strongly about this. But in reality it was very harsh and unnecessarily cruel of Diane.