I didn't remember the hairdresser as being definite. Did he actually spend the night with her?

It's possible - but if he did that, I think it would have been couched in a manipulative way that didn't feel like blackmail. If you haven't watched it for awhile, I suggest re-watching the pilot for the conversation between Trey and George.

I don't believe George had anything directly to do with the murder or even knew who committed it - that's why he asked Trey before he killed himself (why else would he?). It's possible that, when they were teens, Trey convinced George that it must have been Daniel - thus convincing him to testify against Daniel.

There's not a lot of plot in this series to keep track of, so I don't think it's a very good sign that the reviewer doesn't recognize Marcy - both the Senator's mistress for quite awhile, as well as someone who's bed Daniel woke up in after having had sex with her last season post-Lezley-party.

"As others have pointed out, that was the Senator's diner mistress."

From all we that we know (Daniel's vision, his talk with Trey, etc), it seems as if Hanna had consensual sex that night (although granted, while stoned). I don't think we've heard anything yet to indicate she was raped (aside from the charges that the police originally brought) - although it's possible that happened…

"Interesting that Trey knows the exact color of his truck and then lies about Daniel wearing the coat (I checked, he was wearing light blue dress shirt, no coat). "

George had nothing to do with the murder. In the pilot episode during his meeting with Trey in the woods, not long before he commits suicide, he asks Trey if he murdered Hanna.

I don't know… it didn't feel 'easy' to me… I was horrified by the murder. And especially, as the reviewer pointed out, since the show made the brave decision to hold on the violence for an inordinate amount of time - something which is normally unseen in any US television series, even the so-called prestige ones. I…

Assuming Wellick would deny everything vehemently, how does this work? The accusation (watching someone piss) is so ridiculous sounding simply because there is no logical reason for Wellick to have done it - and yet, since Wellick is a rival of Scott, there are logical reasons for him to falsely accuse Wellick in…

I don't think the murder is a move towards nihilism, but rather a further tacking of the show towards consequentialism - one of the threads of the show which has been building since the pilot.

I just don't get people posting that the series "suffers from tangential storytelling" or "filler episodes", etc. It implies that you know exactly what the "story" is after just 6 episodes. In a show that is at least partially about the nature of what is and isn't real, that seems ridiculous to me.

That is definitely one of the reasons this series is currently one of the most enjoyable shows to watch: they keep upending our expectations.

My point was that - as much as I enjoyed Rust Cohle and his (mostly lifted) antinatalist soliloquies (as well as Fukunaga's great direction) - Pizzolatto shied away from any real consequences for the lead characters. Not only did Rust survive (when he probably should have been dead from that injury) and end up…

No problem. It was the least I could do after the one you gave me with "criminal act as leverage".

"…using his criminal act as leverage…"

I don't understand why by this point - after seeing how cleverly Esmail subverts our expectations whenever we think it's resolved - people don't just relax and enjoy the ride and trust that he's thought this through and won't drag things out beyond their sell-by-date.

He just has to kidnap Darlene or Angela - both of whom are known to his henchman. Instant leverage again.

They've linked E(vil) Corp to half a dozen real corporate behemoths already. This episode also had a shout-out to Apple: a $100 free eTunes gift card.

But they're linking E(vil) Corp to Apple just as much. For example, the exploit from Darlene touted a $100 free eTunes gift card.