Chuck is correct, but he is obsessed with proving so, when the balanced course of action would be to wait for Jimmy to incriminate himself. Chuck, however, is so keen to see Jimmy condemned for being less rigid than Chuck himself is, that he is willing to pervert the course of justice in order to see it flow over…

Jimmy is illegal morality and Chuck is immoral law. Jimmy has now turned to immoral law to preserve his ability to pursue illegal morality, thus bringing Jimmy into the worst of both worlds. Saul is a hybrid of Jimmy and Chuck.

I spilt spot remover on your comment and now it's gone.

The panel will now likely believe that what Jimmy was destroying was evidence not of a crime Jimmy committed, but of Chuck's self-destructive obsession with exonerating himself of professional carelessness at the expense of Jimmy's career.

Here, Jimmy begins sending people to their ruined reputations to save his own legal career. Eventually, he will begin sending them beyond their ruined reputations. All the way to Belize.

Perhaps even in prison. Which is why, much later, Saul accepts that in some cases, someone will always go to prison.

Christopher Kennedy Masterson could play a convincing meth addict. Justin Berfield could be a dealer. Erik Per Sullivan could be the elder brother of the kid from Peekaboo. Jane Kaczmarek could be a judge. She's had practice on The Simpsons.

He's being paid for doing a job; his repellent personal views aren't a reason to betray artistic integrity. We can't go around refusing to employ people because they're bigots; that would make us no better than bigots who refuse to employ people they're bigoted against.

There is clear evidence to show it is in his head.

Jimmy has behaved illegally but Chuck has behaved immorally. The latter is less acceptable per se than the former, and the law has provision for dealing with Jimmy's illegal activity, but Chuck is so obsessed with doing his brother down that he is going to great lengths to get Jimmy prosecuted, rather than simply let…

Chuck is as untrustworthy as Michael McKean's dodgy-food salesman from Friends Season 2.

Absolutely Jimmy and Chuck both have faults and have done bad things, but the reason I root for Jimmy and against Chuck is that, unlike Jimmy, Chuck considers himself entirely in the right all the time.

Seasons 1-3 were good. They should have killed David off in Neverland, then joined S4B (Author) to S5B (Hades), then had a final S5 which was Dark Swan & Final Battle.

I want to see Luke working at UNIT.

As someone who does plan to rewatch Miracle Day soon for the first time (I tried it a few months back and gave up after 20 minutes), I think the idea that 'it was a botched first attempt of the Master's (which she can keep calling herself, incidentally) to develop a Cyberman army out of someone connected to the…

To me, the Walt-Jesse relationship is the heart of the show and one of the show's greatest tragedies is how it sours. But then again, you may disagree with me, given your support for Chuck, who I find to be the S4 Walt of BCS.

Me personally, the Walt-Jesse dynamic was a joy to behold up until Jane died, and even on occasion thereafter, right up until Brock. Check out Donna Bowman's AV Club review of 'End Times', where she describes screaming at the screen for Walt and Jesse to team up, and the immense satisfaction when they did (leading of…

Also, if Jimmy took money, it could easily have been money he felt he had earned that he didn't want his dad to give away to con artists. When we saw Jimmy take money from the till, it was money that he had just earned by selling legitimately to the con artist. He earned that $8 and knew that if he left it in the…

Legally does not necessarily equal morally. If Chuck were less uptight and more objective he would just let Jimmy practice law and wait for him to incriminate himself.

The 12-step programme didn't seem to have worked out for them though.