Yep. At best, Jon would hold a matrilineal, weak claim to Winterfell. I imagine there will be a peaceful transition from Jon to Sansa, as Jon and Dany sort of assume a 'co-monarch' type of system, thereby vacating the king of the north title and simultaneously bestowing Winterfell to Sansa, avoiding a pointless war…

Only if the Night's Watch ceases to exist as an organization, which is the way I think they are probably leaning, since the Night's Watch has really served in the narrative only as a completely artificial barrier to inheritance that had only the loose corollary of the clergy in rl medieval history.

Yeah, that's why civil wars are fought. I imagine there are a lot of nobles in the seven kingdoms who feel that Robert was an illegal usurper who stole the throne, regardless of whether he won or not. There is something to be said for the notion that history is written by the victor, but there were still rules. Bob…

Jon was the legitimate son of the last Targaryen heir. In any form of primogeniture I've ever read about, he would now be the recognized heir of the Targaryen dynasty, since the line of succession always runs through the heir, not through the current monarch.

Not necessarily. The Reach will go to whoever the current monarch bestows it upon since their rebellion was defeated, leaving the region without an heir. That would mean that it currently would revert to the central monarch.

I'm fairly sure that Cersei believes she has an unstoppable combat monster at her disposal and, as long as that is the case, will be perfectly happy granting anyone who demands a trial by combat their wish.

No, not really. Historically, if Danaerys is victorious in her campaign, the Baratheon rulership would probably be considered a usurpation of the rightful bloodline or an extended interregnum.

They were coming back from slaughtering one of her principle allies after turning cloak on them. It's a little difficult to paint the Tarlys as somehow being completely innocent bystanders who Danaerys came along and killed for no apparent reason.

Because animals don't really think about being badasses. They think about survival. If Rhaegal or Viserion decided to destroy that thing, they've would have flown around to where it couldn't threaten them and strafed it with fire instead of obeying Dany just to fuel her ego.

Mainly because they've sort of portrayed her as a child and because she's still betrothed to Symon Fossoway, rather than married to him. Betrothals only remained in effect until one or the other of the two intendeds had yet to reach the age of marriage. The show has generally been looser about that sort of thing…

Ignored.

Troll on, brother. Troll on.

It may be a good thing she hasn't. I doubt either of the two wild-ish dragons would have flown directly at a weapon capable of hurting them just to prove how badass they were like she did last week.

The War of Five Kings accomplished more breaking of the wheel than Dany could ever dream of.

Because there's nothing to rebut other than that you are just factually incorrect. Pointing that out over and over again and rudely contradicting other people is not a conversation worth spending any time on.

Okay, you've said this about 90 times now. You are incorrect, but you are free to keep saying it.

Technically not yet. He still has his oath to the Night's Watch as a barrier to inheriting. Right now, technically Talla Tarly would by Lady Tarly under the guidance of a regent until she reaches her majority.

I find it a little difficult to blame Tyrion for not realizing that Euron Greyjoy had abruptly leapt into the ranks of supervillainy.

I'm pretty sure that if the Night's Watch is destroyed, the few remaining alive members won't be beholden to their oaths to it. That would free Sam to inherit Horn Hill, (or the entire Reach if Jon or Dany were to bestow it on him), which would be the type of irony this series likes to engage in - the 'fat, weakling…

It would be sort of a blurry line. There were plenty of wars that were fought to restore a bloodline and the bloodline that was restored was considered to be fighting for their traditional rights, not right of conquest.