Once again, I gotta ask: Remember the reporter from last year, who was threatening to break the rape/murder story about Palmer’s son and daughter?
Wasn’t she named Maureen Kingsley? Is that somehow related or are they just reusing the name?
BEST! CLIFFHANGER! EVER!!!
Remember that anti-drug commercial with two guys in a bar? Where one guy says, “What’s this nonsense about drugs promoting terrorism?” and the other guy keeps saying, “Because it’s a fact, F-A-C-T fact.” Haven’t seen it in a long time, but I keep picturing the two guys as Mike Novick and Tony Almeida (with Mike as the anti-drug guy, of course!) Does anyone remember if it’s really those actors?
(Weekly geographical nitpick): There IS no 210 Laurel Canyon Blvd., dammit! It starts at 1500 in W. Hollywood and goes up. A North Hollywood address would be in the 5000-6000 range.
P.S.: I’m convinced Congress passed the 25th Amendment just so movies and TV shows could make up hokey plotlines about the government being overthrown from within. 
Off-the-shelf. Definitely. Off-the-shelf. Lucky for Mike that he had just bought it at half price at Best Buy!
It was YES - HE STAYS (cuz the question was “Is the Prez capable of carrying out his duties?”) and NO - HE GOES.
Fox doesn’t, but it’s on FX Monday nights at 10 pm central and again on Tuesday at some point, I believe.
It’s on Tuesdays at 5:00 p.m.
I wonder if he filled out the registration card – Purpose for buying this software title: coup.
I don’t think the 25th Amendment angle is too far-fetched. Nobody really knows what the hell the amendment requires, so it’s hard to criticize the writers for inaccuracies. Once they removed him they could show the public, Congress and the allies the same things they showed at Palmer’s trial. If they control the information, they can make him look like he’s mentally unstable.
Tornado warnings interrupted our broadcast in Nebraska, so all I saw of Kim’s scene was Jack hanging up the phone. What happened?
Also, when the VP was talking about the reporter’s First Amendment rights, did anybody else think “Fire in a crowded theater?”
Well, since no one else is picking this up, and 'cause I don’t have much to say about the episode…
Yes, IIRC, that was her name. I don’t know if there’s any connection. If there is, seems like CTU would pick it up pretty fast once they started trying to figure out who Kingsley is.
I’m inclined to think it’s a coincidence, that the writers just forgot they used the name last season, but maybe not.
One other thing, from the previews:
I hope Jack really does shoot that evil bitch Sherry! FOX wouldn’t tease me about that and not deliver, would they?:dubious:
Was I the only one also thinking about how removing the first Black President through this method would go over?
Practically? I did! I knew she was going to be there, too. I kept expecting her to show up for the VP’s little show and give the manipulated evidence that he’s no longer fit to serve, and when she didn’t, I figured that she’s the one behind the whole conspiracy. I have other evidence for that in my mind, but hey, what does that matter in this show 
But her reappareance brought back one of the best TV villians in recent memory and I was happy.
Great episode.
Odd that Palmer and Sherry’s kids from last season are apparently dead or MIA…too bad Kim couldn’t have gone off in the sunset with them. My guess is that when Jack screams at Kim to “Shoot 'em!”, he is talking about that mountain lion that has somehow followed her scent down the mountain and snuck into the house and greets her at the door.
Back to the episode:
Did certainly enjoy the last frame last night!
Funny thing is, the actress who plays Sherry said when she first read for the role she thought, “How nice - I get to be a supportive politician’s wife.” It wasn’t until after about script 4, Season 1, she realized she wasn’t going to be winning any Mother/Wife Of The Year awards with this role! But you have to hand it to her, she’s done a great job and she certainly has become the villan(ess) we all love to hate. She too should be nominated for an Emmy!
Palmer was fishing with his son in the first epi-hour, but that was the only time we saw him. Seems like ages ago this thing started…
I think Sherry was telling David the truth before he kicked her out. Yes, she was in league with Stanton, but had a change of heart. (Sure, she likely changed her mind because it would be more advantageous to her, but still.)
I think all along, she has wanted the best for David – because that would mean the best, i.e., power and access, for her.
As a former part of the Stanton conspiracy, she knows the hacker. She knows about the coup, and is trying to secure the hacker’s silence until SHE is ready to spring him on the scene for David’s rescue.
I’m certain they use some editing tricks in next week’s preview: first we see Jack calmly talking to Sherry (I think), and THEN we see him telling them to come out with their hands up, speaking harshly with her, shooting over her shoulder, etc. I think it’s clear those scenes are reversed – first he surprises them and acts hostile, but then she convinces him they’re working towards the same ends.
I think 24 is repeated on FX on Mondays, but check your local listing (or go to tvguide.com) to make sure.
Interface and Biblio:
Thanks. I’ll try to catch it on Monday.
Why would the hacker’s “signature” be on the SOURCE recordings? Or was that just some other data on the chip? It would seem to me that the signature should be on the false recording. It’s not like the hacker made the source files.
Haw haw!!! 
Of course then he’ll start getting all sorts of junk mail from other coup software publishers, like EZ-VP-Takeover or Coup D’Evil '03 (from Microsoft.)
I gave you an East Coast time… it’s on Mondays at 11:00 p.m and Tuesdays at 5:00 p.m. Eastern.