Color me wrong! king of spain had it right. Which makes a bit less sense to me, since Major Dad then lied to Leo back in 1966, gave him an order to unwittingly attack a civilian target, then uses that info to blackmail him against the war crimes tribunal. And Leo thanks him for it.
I’m usually one of the early WW posters, but for some reason my boss thought I come to work to do thing for HIS business. THE NERVE OF SOME PEOPLE! So, I had to take notes when reading the thread to hit on some of your excellent points.
A. Hoynes. I love the way he stood up to the Prez. Someone said it was odd that he was a conservative DEM, but as a Texan myself, I don’t find it odd at all. Texas DEMS are more conservative than a Maine Republican. Bob Bullock (the late DEM Lt. Gov) endorsed Bush in his 98 Bid for Gov. (Or maybe he did NOT endorse the DEM candidate because he liked Bush… I don’t recall). I find myself agreeing with Hoynes on almost every issue. I’d vote for him. Which begs the question: Will Hoynes run against him? It seems not, but how great would that make the series? A strongly contested primary versus the VEEP. Storylines abound. OR he has a “Seat at the table.” Either way, we are seeing MUCH more of John Hoynes, Rush Chairman, Damn glad to meet ya.
And I am not sure if Pres knows John is an Alk or he was dressing him down. I don’t see Jeb doing that, so I will jump in the camp of doesn’t know. It is amazing how people can see a scene so differently. here I am thinking he is out of character, and I fail to see that. He just seemed pissy when he asked. Maybe he was letting Hoynes know that he knew he was a drunk and if Hoynes runs against him, everyone else will know. Hoynes did “out” him after all. Comments?
B. Leo. He was also a drug user, right? And on the war crimes issue. I don’t recall Delta Burke’s husband saying that Leo would be found guilty. Simply that he could be tried for a war crime. And yes, Leo should be the third different cast member in three years to win the emmy.
C. I must be the only person who liked the penny subplot. It was similar to Donna’s stamp plot, but I see Josh turning into Bartlett.
D. I liked the reporter, but it may be a bit redundant with Danny. Plus, if he left 2 1/2 years ago, wouldn’t he have left almost immediatly after Jeb took office.
E. Stockard Channing looked MUCH better this episode.
F. Donna. Is the diary plot over? I see the guy having an ethical crisis and calling Josh and Donna’s bluff.
Good episode. I didn’t realize how much I enjoyed it until I got here. Thanks for the great discussion.
[rant] Dammit to hell, I missed the last two episodes–my VCR keeps pooping out on me. I’ve never missed an episode before, and now I’m missing good stuff. [/rant]
Regarding Donna, isn’t the Lawyer just doing his job with the Diary thing? Wouldn’t it be unethical of him to not challenge her when she says there’s no diary if he did see one? How he saw it is irrelevant.
I have question. I started watching midway through season 2. Has this staff been the same staff from the beginning? Isn’t it odd for the President’s senior staff to last 4 years? Chief of Staffs have a 2-3 year turnover don’t they? Clinton had about 4 of them (Panetta, Bowles, McLarty, Emmanuel?) Isn’t it about time one of them either leave or gets fired?
Can someone offer a refresher on how the MS thing came out? I missed that episode. What did Hoynes do? Did he actually tell Toby? Was it Toby that prompted them to go public with it? I did see the show where Toby confronted Leo and Jed and I thought it was excellent.
Oblong it was much more subtle than that. Hoynes never came out and told anyone (at least, not to my knowledge). But Toby put two and two together through some comments that Hoynes had made. Also, Hoynes was branching further and further away from the President, going off to publicly speak to groups as a “gearing up” for President. The press were starting to become a tad suspicious and, with Toby eventually figuring it out Leo and Jed figured others will fairly soon as well.
So Hoynes never said anything but did force their hand in the matter.
Word to everything that Podkayne said.
ShibbOleth, thanks. By the way, did you know last season’s Thanksgiving episode was actually titled “Shibboleth?” One of my favorite eps. 
HelloKitty - Um…no. Did you see the look on Donna’s face at the end there? She looked like she felt awful, IMHO. Anyway, I’m sorry so many of y’all dislike Donna - I have issues with her characterization sometimes but I love her when she’s written well.
watsonwil, yes, Leo was addicted to some prescription drug…I’m blanking on what exactly, but I think a painkiller. And I liked the penny subplot too, if only for how it furthers Sam’s ongoing storyline this season. And a great line: “They’re worthless.” “Actually, they’re worth one cent.”
Two more notes on the ep:
-
It seems like since the shooting Josh is getting worse about blowing up over little things - but I love how he’s incapable of holding a grudge against his friends. Once the initial anger passes he forgets he was ever mad.
-
Jed’s still being all self-righteous and denying his own responsibility for the MS mess. Dammit, Sam’d better call him on it soon. Jed’s usually my favorite character and I don’t enjoy being mad at him.
I lived outside the country until recently, so just started watching a bit in summer reruns. I had heard of this show but thought it was on HBO (like Sopranos) so hadn’t even looked for it. So, no, didn’t know that. Am quickly getting addicted to the show, though. Is this the second season or has it been on longer than that? Maybe I can find the old episodes on DVD somewhere?
Oh, yeah, totally. I don’t see anyone saying that he’s a big meanie or anything. Donna lied under oath, and she got bit on the butt for it, and it might have repercussions beyond this episode.
But the thing is, if lawyer-man tells anyone how he saw the diary, he’ll be in trouble, too, because he knew at the time that he went to her house that he was going to be participating in the investigation, so he would get into trouble. He glossed over it by saying that he’d seen her “socially,” but I think if his bosses knew that he’d seen her, er, let’s just say ‘in her underwear,’ he’d be in deep doo-doo, first for doing it, and second for speaking misleadingly about it during the deposition. Josh and Donna are using that as leverage against him getting Donna into trouble over lying under oath (and she does totally deserve to get into trouble–I’m not denying that!)
As for the subconsiously-wanting-Josh-to-save-her thing, I’m more with pepperlandgirl than HelloKitty–it’s the evil writer jerking her around to create plot. 
Completely irrelevant sidenote: Stocker Channing provides the voice for Commissioner Barabar Gordon on Batman Beyond. I think that is very cool.
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by pepperlandgirl *
**
Not trying to beat a dead horse, but I just thought of something…didn’t Josh already read the journal before turning it over to the lawyer guy? He already knew about the entries for the 2 days in October…surely he would have already known also if Donna wrote “I [heart] Josh” in the margins. Or did Donna just tell Josh the days she was with the other guy?
I assumed that Josh had already read the thing before turning it over to him to make sure there wasn’t any info about POTUS, etc. That would seem the smart thing to do since they weren’t being forced to turn over the journal.
ShibbOleth: we’re starting the third season now. No DVD episodes are available yet, although rumor has it they might be soon.
Simulposted with HelloKitty, or I would’ve said this in the last post - Josh specifically said in the last scene that he didn’t read the diary. (At least, I’m pretty sure he did. ShibbOleth, want to check the tape and see?)
I guess they are just talking to fast for me this year!!! I’ve got the tape, I will review it this weekend.
Will resist the urge to post until I’ve watched it again. 
Why am I thinking that much ado is going to be made of the fact that Donna’s sleeping with the Repub lawyer was set up by Ainsley???
Am I the only one that thinks that was weird?
That’s the first thing I noticed spooje. Could Ainsley be guilty of foul-play?
No. Just because Ainsly is a Republican doesn’t mean she’d to that to her boss and her co-workers. She’s not completely devoid of morals.
Besides, when Ainsley hooked them up, Lawyer Guy wasn’t even working on that committee. Probably it was just a plot devise—how else would Donna meet the lawyer? It’s not like she mingles with a lot of Republicans.
I’m not saying she’s a bad guy.
I’m just saying something is not what it seems here.
Mark my words, there will be a plot twist regarding this.
A loose transcription of the final scene…
Josh: There’s a coffee shop across the street; you’ll read it there, you’ve got an hour. I haven’t read it, but if anything bothers you, you’ll issue a subpoena in the morning, you’ll have it back before the end of the day, if not, that’s that.
LL: Yeah.
Josh: If I read any of this in the newspaper, or if anything happens I don’t like, I’ve got the entries for October 4th and 5th.
LL: What’s October 4th and 5th?
Josh: You.
LL: That’s fair.
I have a different take on that. I was under the impression that Hoynes was told at the beginning of the campaign that Bartlett wouldn’t be seeking a 2nd term because of the MS, and would be free to start making his appearances during the first term. It’s not that he forced anybody’s hand, but that his “authorized” actions were awfully suspicious, and Toby was smart enough to figure out that Bartlett may not have been planning on running for a second term. Leo may have predicted he’d do so earlier, which is why he had the handshake 2 episodes earlier to “start the ‘Campaign for Re-election’” (okay, so that’s obscure and ridiculously minute, but it’s what I’m good at!).
So, in summary, I don’t think that Hoynes was acting dubious.
I, too, found it odd that CJ was even talking about the Texas gun incident. I was annoyed by the whole gun thing, as I think concealed carry is a good idea. I find myself wondering if there has ever been an incident like that in real life: guy with a license to carry trying to take out a bad guy, missing, and hitting a bystander (of any age)?
I was bugged by the penny thing, as I think we should discontinue the darn things. And while the Illinois Congressional delegation do play a role in its retention, a more important factor is heavy lobbying by the industry that sells the govt the metal to make the pennies.
I liked the reporter who’d been kicked out of Myanmar, but am wondering what’s happened to Danny.
I, too, noticed that Bartlett does not seem to know that Hoines is a recovering alcoholic. Hoines is often put in an unsympathic light, but a big exception to that was the scene (1st season?) where he asks Leo how long since he’s been to a meeting, and tells him of one he can safely attend. (Disguised as a poker game. I hear that secret meetings really do exist for people who’d lose their jobs if found out.)
Am I the only one that noticed that Danny was not on the show last season either? He didn’t just stop showing up this season. I don’t know if he was in the second part of the season opener last year, but other than that, the only time I heard him mentioned was when he phoned CJ to let her know that one of the President’s daughters had made a statement about White House policy.
As for the gun incident, the White House commenting on it isn’t that surprising, it would have been national news very fast. But the timeline is bothersome, the gun man pulls his gun in church in Texas (Central Time) and they are commenting on it in DC (Eastern Time) before the President gets home from church? Seems kind of fast.