Chaotic Good vs. Lawful Evil. Jimmy's questionable escapades are largely in the interest of helping others— even his practice is elderly law, helping a group of people whose are often taken advantage of due to their limitations and infirmities.

Total reach. LOSTification of TV watching. "Don't watch for the story and characters, hunt for the background clues!"

(which, by the way, I would have "truly owned up to it" if that were someone I cared about whether I did it or fucking not, because Chuck's strategy was to "pretend I jumped off in the deep end of the pool with like seven anchors strapped to my naked body").

I don't know what "right about Jimmy all along" means in this case. We know that Chuck continually did everything he could to hold him down. We know Chuck is full of pomp about respecting the ethics of the law but acts underhanded and disloyal toward Jimmy.

I have a lot more forgiveness for people who strive to do the right thing but have lapses in ethics along the way, than people who strive to maintain a standard of ethics but use that standard for morally dubious behavior. (Especially since Chuck's conduct has been so underhanded, I don't see it as ethically right,…

Well, you certainly made a convincing argument that Chuck is the self-appointed Morals and Ethics Policeman, but you say it like it's a good thing.

The violent hatred of Chuck here is pretty hilarious.

Nothing Jimmy has done justifies Chuck's constant attempts to crush him. Nothing.

Chuck didn't get motivated to "retain business for his firm" until he found out Kim and Jimmy were involved. Chuck's primary motivation has always been to crush Jimmy.

I don't think he's morally in the right. He's on a single-minded quest to destroy his own brother, who looks up to him and admires him and puts everything else aside to take care of him when he needs it.

Damn, Jimmy. Ernesto warned you. I don't know how you still let your guard down around Chuck after all this.

It's a great show. Burr's work often doesn't get credit for its depth. It's easy to write a column slagging him off as "angry white male complaining about PC culture," and I've seen people do it, but that's the most superficial way to view his work; indeed, I suspect people do so have not actually paid attention to…

Why do you put so many "words" in "quotes" in your "post"?

Apart from "1216," do we know that Chuck has ever been wrong?

Yeah, it's a stretch that I think breaks plausibility for me, but it's not entirely inconceivable. I just don't think we'd see the scenes of Chuck starting to struggle with his illness and become disoriented before passing out if those scenes were phony.

They kept the Chuck reveal from us in season 1 because they kept it from Jimmy. It wouldn't have had nearly the impact it did if we had known already.

Chuck is arrogant, full of himself, and convinced he can never be wrong. Are you going to blame Jimmy for how Chuck spoke to the Mesa Verde representatives at the hearing?

That would be so dark. I hope they do it.

Well, dragged out implies bad or unnatural storytelling. I don't think they're doing a bad job at all; they're telling the story more slowly, but more richly. Hell, thinking about where the show is now, Jimmy becoming Saul in season 1 feels much too fast and like we would have missed some great characters that…

Chuck is a worse person than even macho, racist Hank from season 1, let alone the Hank that was developed over the course of the series.