John Potts June 13, 2019 Share June 13, 2019 Wow, way to read a room, Nikita. I get that you're obsessively hunting the Bad Guys (TM), but you're really exploiting your friend's feelings for you there. And then you nearly get his house blown up and both of you killed! And how did you miss the camera at Miss Evill's house? Shouldn't that have tipped you off the house wasn't abandoned? First Lady - you have to know that was a red flag. She's not wrong, she has to know that her words are seen differently now she's married to the President. That public meeting was way too supportive. All the Tom offered were some bland platitudes and they're all applauding? Were they a carefully chosen audience of cheerleaders? Was anyone else interested how Kirkman would answer the porn question? I can accept him coming out on the side of either free speech or public morality, but I'd like to know where he stands on something because Kirkman seems to be almost free of any agenda. And while I get Kirkman was the bottom rung on the political ladder, he should have some idea of how the system works - you have to build support for your agenda and push it through Congress (as Housing & Urban Development, it was probably more about getting anyone to care about his policies, now he has some real political capital to trade). On 4/6/2017 at 1:22 PM, Princess Lucky said: I don't love that we have no actual actors connected to the conspiracy anymore, and we can't put a face to our villains. That's an ongoing problem for this show. We have someone to root for, now we need someone to hate. I agree - there needs to be some forward momentum on the conspiracy plot (and no, I don't consider, "They really don't like iconic buildings!" to be forward progress). So of course, they kill off another of the people that might have given them some answers. And boy did two experienced Agents screw up that scene - if you don't have any cuffs on you, have Atwood sit on her until you find some way of keeping her restrained (he's got to outweigh her by at least 50 pounds). On 4/6/2017 at 11:34 PM, Stacey1014 said: it felt like I was watching two different shows -- one about politics and the other about catching a bad guy. More like three - there's the "Kirkman family drama" as well that I thought they'd dropped, but seems to be coming back into the picture. I guess there must be somebody that's interested in it! On 4/7/2017 at 7:18 AM, thuganomics85 said: so it's now time for gun control to enter into the picture. I.... well, I can actually buy that, because that is one of those topics that would be debated no matter what. Totally not surprised that the Kirkman's are on the more liberal side, since while Kirkman may be an Independent, I do think he leans Democratic on most views. Not to mention he was just shot! If there was ever a time when there was a chance for a gun control bill to make it through Congress, you'd think it would be then. I understand that he may prefer to pick other battles, but with (probably) a big sympathy vote and a non entrenched Congress (weren't about a third of its new members Independents - which is totally unbelievable, but established on screen - so there's no definitive majority for anything?) it would probably be the best time to attempt some form of Gun Law reform. Also, one thing they haven't revealed - was the gun that shot the President licensed? I would guess not (the Conspiracy probably wouldn't want any trail that might lead back to them) which would be another lever the President could pull to possibly enact reforms. Yes, it would probably dominate any other agenda he might have - it rather depends on whether he wants his Presidency to be remembered for one big thing or several little things (other than how he came into it, obviously!). On 4/12/2017 at 4:33 PM, scarynikki12 said: they mentioned a defense contracting firm that Hannah (and, by extension, the general public) had believed to be out of business. I think they are the behind the attack on the Capitol and the motive may end up being as simple as money. They want to profit off of the fear, uncertainty and desire for revenge that occur in the wake of a terrorist attack. It depends on how it's played but I think a simple motive would make the most sense and play the best when all gets revealed. Except it can't just be about money. Nobody in it for the money would take the insane risks of blowing up the government unless they were absolutely certain they could profit from it. If you're prepared to resort to terrorist acts, it would be far cheaper (and less treasonous!) to sabotage your rivals so you're the ones who gain. I don't doubt that plenty of the Faceless minions involved probably do have mundane motives, but those at the top must have a political agenda for their actions to make any sense (of course, there is the possibility that their actions don't make any sense, but I live in hope). On 4/24/2017 at 2:17 PM, Netfoot said: Decapitation is usually the prelude to a coup. You destroy the government, and while the country is in shock and also leaderless, you step in to fill the void, seize control of the military, declare yourself King... or what ever the plan calls for. Except... in this case, the decapitation appears to be a prelude to nothing! Which is why the fact that whenever our heroes find anyone involved in the coup (so far) they have immediately died is so frustrating. Hell, have it be a crew of disgruntled architects who want to rebuild the Statue of Liberty in marble, just give us something! Link to comment
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.