|
Random Stranger posted:How did an army general order the air force and navy to attack anyway? When I was in the military it was surprising what you could get away with carrying a metal clipboard and an air of authority. Because in the military it isn't just who you are or even your rank, it's who you represent and a metal clipboard is not to be trifled with. I was called to the CO's office several times and bitched out for metal clipboard antics. That was a long time ago, the metal clipboard has probably been replaced with something else but the principle is the same... people take orders because they believe you represent someone very high in the chain of command.
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2016 20:21
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 25, 2024 21:03 |
|
|
Random Stranger posted:Yeah. I actually wouldn't mind seeing the show exploring the possibility of a coup or separatist movements in the US where some of the states refuse to recognize the new president. But a general seizing power wouldn't just go, "Grr! I'm evil and I want to just go shoot at another country an hour after everyone in the legislative branch and the heads of all of the executive branch save one were killed!" Which is just as absurd as Iran having their fleet standing by waiting to launch at a moment's notice when something bad happens in the US. Wouldn't the state governors immediately appoint new reps who would immediately elect a speaker who would then become the acting president? I mean sure it would take a few days but I'm pretty sure the chain of succession is not a one time deal, as soon as a new Speaker was elected they would be the acting president under the chain of succession.
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2016 20:38
|
|
|
Three Olives posted:Wouldn't the state governors immediately appoint new reps who would immediately elect a speaker who would then become the acting president? I mean sure it would take a few days but I'm pretty sure the chain of succession is not a one time deal, as soon as a new Speaker was elected they would be the acting president under the chain of succession. Once you take the oath you are president. We settled this issue about 150 years ago with
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2016 20:48
|
|
|
AbsolutelySane posted:He's not even one of the Joint Chiefs, I think. Of course, he could be the highest ranking surviving officer and just decided that made him Supreme Commander during the crisis. Still, it is pretty cartoony. It reminds me of the C&C Red Alert FMV scenes for some reason, although there's less Ray Wise. The problem is that absolutely no one in the Pentagon, including the joint chiefs themselves, is in command of anything. They're just advisors and coordinators. All of the four star commanders are elsewhere, the Pentagon just passes on the approved orders from the SecDef or President. The commander of all (for workable definitions of all) deployable, fighting US Army forces in the United States is the FORSCOM commander at Ft. Bragg, NC. So is he in command of US Army forces in a crisis in the US? No. They'd be transferred to the commander of NORTHCOM in Colorado Springs, CO. He's in charge of actually fighting and anti-terrorism inside the borders of the US, but only with forces formally assigned to him, which are usually just NORAD (which he also commands) aircraft and any groundforces (usually national guard) doing special anti-terrorism training or support missions. Oh, and the Military District of Washington. So if the (relatively junior) 4 star deputy chief of whatever tells the local military forces to do something, they'll probably listen in the short term, but if it's something outrageous they're going to call their real boss, who is a senior, highly vetted and specifically appointed and Congressionally approved commander, not some staff guy without any clear authority. And if that guy gets nuts, the FORSCOM commander has a shitload more men if he wants to persuade his subordinate division commanders at Ft. Bragg and Fort Campell to take a moderate drive to the capital. Number Ten Cocks fucked around with this message at 20:55 on Sep 23, 2016 |
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2016 20:50
|
|
|
Three Olives posted:Wouldn't the state governors immediately appoint new reps who would immediately elect a speaker who would then become the acting president? I mean sure it would take a few days but I'm pretty sure the chain of succession is not a one time deal, as soon as a new Speaker was elected they would be the acting president under the chain of succession. First, no, once you've sworn the oath you'er actually the president. Sutherland's character is the president, not an acting president who can be bumped. Second, Governors can't appoint Representatives, only Senators. You need actually elections to replace Representatives. Third, even if it worked that way and you tried it for the Senate, the Senator Pro Tempore is the most senior of majority party. So first appointed? What's the majority party, the one that existed, or the one that exists after 100 appointments, assuming you had the minority party in control of 26+ governors and it flips?
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2016 20:53
|
|
|
If they're trying to play it 'realistic' and the mention of the Paris and Brussels attack as well as mentioning ISIS, al-quada and the Taliban as possible culprits kind of suggests they are then the only 'real world' actor that could carry out an attack like this is the US army. Cartoonish general kind of confirms this in my mind. Kiefer Sutherland was good, show is kind of meh
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2016 21:04
|
|
|
Heard on the radio they do two survivors now since 2008. So they each help rebuild one of the branches of government.
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2016 21:58
|
|
|
Honestly it feels like of silly that we even do the State of the Union in the first place, there is no requirement that it be done in person and the safety, logistics and costs hardly seem worth it these days.
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2016 01:01
|
|
|
GaussianCopula posted:It's basically Tom Clancy's Executive Order the TV show without having the actual rights to the IP. Which is why I'm just going to enjoy the absurdity and melodrama like when 9/11 happened during 24's first season and the show went nuts. I already saw enough flashes of Jack Bauer during Kirkman's talk to the Iranian ambassador for me to pretend.
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2016 01:09
|
|
|
It's only a matter of time before Kiefer shoves a towel down someone's throat and then yanks it out.
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2016 01:24
|
|
|
Eagerly awaiting the lawsuit from Tom Clancy's estate over the stuff they lifted wholesale from Debt of Honor/Executive Orders Watched on DVR and the story, plotholes and all, are just what I wanted so far. I hate TCOT war porn like the Chris Kyle or Benghazi movies but I always loved over-the-top technothriller BS from reading Tom Clancy books in middle school study hall to 24.
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2016 07:09
|
|
|
bigis posted:Pretty cool that this is on Netflix in Australia week by week. Yeah, just saw it pop up on netflix tonight while browsing, watching it now. E: It was alright, pretty cheesy, but it might be okay. I'll continue watching it, thankfully being on netflix for me means it will be easy to follow and catch up. drunkill fucked around with this message at 11:31 on Sep 24, 2016 |
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2016 10:44
|
|
|
US politics trivia is like crack to me so this whole show has been stuck in my head since I watched the premiere. - You need to repopulate the SCOTUS. You need advice and consent of the Senate, I think there's a designated survivor for the legislative branches too, if the show goes with that, you could probably get away with Kirkman and the Last Senator sitting down and agreeing on a slate of names. Start with just enough people to get it up and running again so it can respond to situations, maybe one CJ and four AJs. - The Vice Presidency is now vacant, Kirkman and the Last Senator need to name someone for that position (and all other cabinet officer positions that have been vacated). Deputy Secretaries who survive are first in line for those roles to ensure continuity. VP can be some respected elder statesman like a former Secretary of State or, hell, if you have one kicking around in reasonable shape in this universe, even a one-term former President. Going across the aisle in this one might look good too. - Tying back to that previous point, not only is Kirkman challenged by his political inexperience, but the entire situation is unprecedented and centuries of experience and knowledge have literally gone up in smoke. A smart move would be some kind of committee or panel to consult and give advice on everything that's being done to rebuild government, with constitutional scholars, retired Senators and Congressmen, retired Supreme Court Justices, etc. - New elections ASAP. This includes the Presidency. I would announce a public timeline of "as soon as six months, not later than 12" and stick to it. Basically as quickly as primaries can be organized and ballots printed as the emergency situation allows. As noted above the states can mostly repopulate the Senate with interim appointments themselves, but not the House. It's also positively ludicrous every one of over 500 House members and 100 Senators would've perished. Someone's going to be home sick, someone's going to be in hospital because they are having a baby, plenty are going to be abroad on trips or in their home constituencies doing stuff even if it's SOTU. It also robs every last shred of legitimacy from a military junta because they wouldn't be replacing an "unelected figurehead" but are actually becoming one themselves while interfering with the democratic process. - Kirkman needs to get ahead of the "sort of fired" story from the get-go and slip it through while the nation's still in shock from the attack, because there's no time for that bullshit. POTUS chose him as the designated survivor despite the intent to fire/have him resign soon after, so POTUS trusted his judgement and character in a potential crisis. That's the argument. We now live in a new world blah blah, also elections soon. It's not going to stay under wraps because all of his policies were removed from the SOTU address and the transcripts are always sent online ahead of time so some hack is going to figure it out in a day max. - The financial industry needs to be put in the freezer because they're a bunch of babies who can tantrum and cause more damage to the world than any Capitol bombing. All of this crap would be more than enough drama to propel a TV show but I guess only I would watch it and maybe whoever loved The West Wing (which was a small but lucrative demo, to be sure). A Typical Goon posted:If they're trying to play it 'realistic' and the mention of the Paris and Brussels attack as well as mentioning ISIS, al-quada and the Taliban as possible culprits kind of suggests they are then the only 'real world' actor that could carry out an attack like this is the US army. Cartoonish general kind of confirms this in my mind. Kiefer Sutherland was good, show is kind of meh Yeah, thinking back my money is on inside job as well.
|
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2016 08:30
|
|
Antti posted:US politics trivia is like crack to me so this whole show has been stuck in my head since I watched the premiere. You should read the later books in the Jack Ryan universe (Debt of Honor, Executive Order and maybe Bear and the Dragon) for a really good story around this scenario. Antti posted:- You need to repopulate the SCOTUS. You need advice and consent of the Senate, I think there's a designated survivor for the legislative branches too, if the show goes with that, you could probably get away with Kirkman and the Last Senator sitting down and agreeing on a slate of names. Start with just enough people to get it up and running again so it can respond to situations, maybe one CJ and four AJs. You will have a number of SCOTUS judges surviving who did not attend. But yes, this would be a high priority, though there will be more than one senator, see below. Antti posted:- Tying back to that previous point, not only is Kirkman challenged by his political inexperience, but the entire situation is unprecedented and centuries of experience and knowledge have literally gone up in smoke. A smart move would be some kind of committee or panel to consult and give advice on everything that's being done to rebuild government, with constitutional scholars, retired Senators and Congressmen, retired Supreme Court Justices, etc. He needs a legal staff to advice him, but not a full blown committee or panel, given that that would end in partisan bickering for sure. Antti posted:- New elections ASAP. This includes the Presidency. I would announce a public timeline of "as soon as six months, not later than 12" and stick to it. Basically as quickly as primaries can be organized and ballots printed as the emergency situation allows. As noted above the states can mostly repopulate the Senate with interim appointments themselves, but not the House. It's also positively ludicrous every one of over 500 House members and 100 Senators would've perished. Someone's going to be home sick, someone's going to be in hospital because they are having a baby, plenty are going to be abroad on trips or in their home constituencies doing stuff even if it's SOTU. It also robs every last shred of legitimacy from a military junta because they wouldn't be replacing an "unelected figurehead" but are actually becoming one themselves while interfering with the democratic process. You can't do that. The presidential election timeline is set out in the constitution and he can't just change that by fiat. Given that there was some talk about the next election that might be just around the corner anyway. As for Congress, state law dictates how the Senate vacancies are going to be filled (a lot of them will just be picked by the respective governor) while the House vacancies have to be filled by special election on a state by state basis. It should also be assumed that at least a rump Congress still exists, because no one can assume that the State of the Union had perfect attendance and the bomb killed every last one of them. Antti posted:- Kirkman needs to get ahead of the "sort of fired" story from the get-go and slip it through while the nation's still in shock from the attack, because there's no time for that bullshit. POTUS chose him as the designated survivor despite the intent to fire/have him resign soon after, so POTUS trusted his judgement and character in a potential crisis. That's the argument. We now live in a new world blah blah, also elections soon. It's not going to stay under wraps because all of his policies were removed from the SOTU address and the transcripts are always sent online ahead of time so some hack is going to figure it out in a day max. Simply being president in a time of crisis should put that story to rest. Sure, his opponents will use the line probably until he is no longer president, but it does not constitute a legal challenge to his position in any form, so it can be ignored, especially given that he is in the most "rally around the flag" moment ever. Antti posted:- The financial industry needs to be put in the freezer because they're a bunch of babies who can tantrum and cause more damage to the world than any Capitol bombing. Well that is SOP under these circumstances for sure. As multiple people have already said, a military coup is just insane. It would be far more likely that the military would cooperate with the White House staff to isolate the president and reduce his power that way, but actually replacing him as head of state? No chance, especially given that there is no clear and present danger to the US. Sure, one act of terrorism hurts, but they are neither at war (actual military conflict not "war on terrorism") nor does it look like the internal security is a problem with a number of terrorist attacks. This was one isolated event. The mentioning of Paris and Brussels by the way is just absurd, as those were not 9/11 style attacks that were centrally planned from some cave but pretty autonomously acting cells that hit soft targets, which is completely different from placing a bomb in the Capitol building. That anti-tank mine was so absurd, you can only laugh about it. Those mines have ~5.7 kg TNT inside them, which is a laughable amount of explosives (see this video to see the effects of 5kg TNT https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zhTiRYwJqHY) if you want to damage a building like Congress, not to mention how difficult it would be to get such a mine into the building without detection.
|
|
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2016 10:18
|
|
|
poo poo, I forgot that, the Constitution has the election terms set in stone. Okay either you need to pass an amendment to get around that which is extremely unlikely in this mess or you just live with it. So you super definitely need to repopulate the line of succession, but that's actually kind of awkward that you can't "recreate" a democratic mandate for the President like you can in a parliamentary system. All the more reason to stick with Kirkman for everyone involved. This makes Seth's notion of making a General or the CIA Director President even more stupid. I'm offended they had a character who's supposed to be a WH speechwriter speak that line. Re: the panel, I would hope there wouldn't be so much partisan bickering in this situation, I guess it depends. It wouldn't have any actual authority anyway, it'd be there to make recommendations. quote:Simply being president in a time of crisis should put that story to rest. Sure, his opponents will use the line probably until he is no longer president, but it does not constitute a legal challenge to his position in any form, so it can be ignored, especially given that he is in the most "rally around the flag" moment ever. Hmm. You're probably right in our universe. Unfortunately this is a show on ABC so I fully expect it to be a Thing. And it doesn't matter if it's a legal issue or not, it's a political issue and the nation needs a leader it can unequivocally trust in right now. Sulphagnist fucked around with this message at 10:46 on Sep 25, 2016 |
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2016 10:40
|
|
|
He seemed a lot more competent than I was expecting his character to be, UK Netflix description said he was mild-mannered and politically unambitious, was hoping he'd spend more of the episode bumbling and going "aw heck"
|
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2016 13:08
|
|
|
GaussianCopula posted:The mentioning of Paris and Brussels by the way is just absurd, as those were not 9/11 style attacks that were centrally planned from some cave but pretty autonomously acting cells that hit soft targets, which is completely different from placing a bomb in the Capitol building. That anti-tank mine was so absurd, you can only laugh about it. Those mines have ~5.7 kg TNT inside them, which is a laughable amount of explosives (see this video to see the effects of 5kg TNT https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zhTiRYwJqHY) if you want to damage a building like Congress, not to mention how difficult it would be to get such a mine into the building without detection. Inside job. The contractors who refurbished the Capitol the other year were drilling cavities in the stonework and filling them with RDX or something during the restoration job. The Capitol building was the bomb.
|
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2016 13:59
|
|
|
Antti posted:US politics trivia is like crack to me so this whole show has been stuck in my head since I watched the premiere. I appreciated this post. The pilot set up the show to be focused more on foreign policy rather than domestic, but like you I would much rather see the domestic policy issues.
|
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2016 14:04
|
|
|
If any surviving congressmen don't like a bill they can kill it with a quorum call until you actually fill 51% of the seats. Technically they can't really pass anything at all by the Constitution, but the house rules assume a quorum is present unless someone calls for a count. It's not clear that overrides the obvious fact that a quorum could not possibly have existed unless we're counting ghosts. My guess is they'd pretend and everything would be ruled unconstitutional at a later date.
|
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2016 14:48
|
|
Number Ten Cocks posted:If any surviving congressmen don't like a bill they can kill it with a quorum call until you actually fill 51% of the seats. Technically they can't really pass anything at all by the Constitution, but the house rules assume a quorum is present unless someone calls for a count. It's not clear that overrides the obvious fact that a quorum could not possibly have existed unless we're counting ghosts. My guess is they'd pretend and everything would be ruled unconstitutional at a later date. Actually, the required quorum is a simple majority of the members of the respective chamber. So, if only 10 survived, 6 would be the quorum required.
|
|
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2016 15:46
|
|
|
GaussianCopula posted:Actually, the required quorum is a simple majority of the members of the respective chamber. So, if only 10 survived, 6 would be the quorum required. That's not true in most states and corporate boards. But it looks like it's true in Congress. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quorum#United_States
|
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2016 16:10
|
|
|
sout posted:He seemed a lot more competent than I was expecting his character to be, UK Netflix description said he was mild-mannered and politically unambitious, was hoping he'd spend more of the episode bumbling and going "aw heck" In real life competent leaders hire competent leaders because it reduces their workload.
|
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2016 17:52
|
|
|
GaussianCopula posted:You should read the later books in the Jack Ryan universe (Debt of Honor, Executive Order and maybe Bear and the Dragon) for a really good story around this scenario. I don't know, by the mid-'90s Clancy had already become ridiculously xenophobic. Debt of Honor is full of Japan-bashing, the portrayal of Muslims in Executive Orders is borderline offensive, and The Bear and the Dragon is just Clancy writing the invasion of Red China that he clearly fantasized about for about fifteen years.
|
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2016 20:34
|
|
|
Timby posted:I don't know, by the mid-'90s Clancy had already become ridiculously xenophobic. Debt of Honor is full of Japan-bashing, the portrayal of Muslims in Executive Orders is borderline offensive, and The Bear and the Dragon is just Clancy writing the invasion of Red China that he clearly fantasized about for about fifteen years. Even worse is the prose
|
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2016 20:37
|
|
|
I can still remember that there were horrific sex scenes, although the details have fortunately faded.
|
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2016 20:49
|
|
|
Number Ten Cocks posted:I can still remember that there were horrific sex scenes, although the details have fortunately faded. I believe there was a lengthy subplot in Debt of Honor about how the Japanese prime minister favored white American prostitutes.
|
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2016 21:07
|
|
|
I remember after 9/11, congress also had a DS for both the House and the Senate for both parties each. Not sure if that would be a plot point on the show.
|
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2016 22:58
|
|
|
GaussianCopula posted:
Did they actually indicate at what point they are at in the election cycle? Knowing US politics, if it's just after the mid-terms, then the early primary season has probably already begun, with potentially several candidates from the opposing party already having announced. If it's in the election year, then I assume the primaries are already in full swing with multiple states having already voted. It will be interesting to see how (or whether) they will address this dynamic, or if there will be a Mitt Romney (or maybe even Donald Trump) type of character causing trouble for our heros.
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2016 02:36
|
|
|
Bucswabe posted:Did they actually indicate at what point they are at in the election cycle? They did, the show starts in year 3 or 4 of the former president's term. That's the whole reason Kirkman is being fired, he doesn't help the re-election cause.
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2016 05:37
|
|
|
drunkill posted:Inside job. The contractors who refurbished the Capitol the other year were drilling cavities in the stonework and filling them with RDX or something during the restoration job. The Capitol building was the bomb. The tank bomb is a red herring to blame isis when it's really an inside job.
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2016 06:17
|
|
|
I liked the Clancy books up to Executive Orders. Bear and the Dragon was ho-hum political self-insertion, Rainbow Six was pretty badass political self-insertion (although not technically a Ryan book), and the Teeth of the Tiger was laughably bad. Robby Jackson (Samuel L. Jackson from Patriot Games) ends up being president, gets killed by white supremacists, and the scumbag VP from EO ends up in charge (I think? I read this once when it came out and never again). Also in a universe where poo poo a million times more awful happened the characters reference 9/11 as their vengeance motivation 
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2016 06:39
|
|
|
howe_sam posted:They did, the show starts in year 3 or 4 of the former president's term. That's the whole reason Kirkman is being fired, he doesn't help the re-election cause. If it's the SOTU of the dead President's re-election year, then Kirkman would have something like nine months of his term left to serve. I would actually love to see a limited scope narrative where Kirkman doesn't try to run for re-election and focuses on being a caretaker President cleaning up the mess and putting the country back on track while making sure the elections go through without problems and then handing the keys over to the next guy. You can definitely wring two, three, even four seasons out of that. Why I'm gravitating towards is that they specifically went out of their way to show Kirkman as not being the type to be interested in holding political power so I think it would fit what little we've been told of his character. It also makes the military coup plot even more ludicrous.
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2016 09:01
|
|
|
Closer to a full year, state of the union is generally in January and he can still do stuff in the lame duck.ElwoodCuse posted:I liked the Clancy books up to Executive Orders. Up to Executive Orders Clancy's books were somewhat moored in reality. Everything after that the military tech just went straight sci-fi, and his political leanings became way more transparent. Bear and Dragon is when I checked out.
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2016 14:00
|
|
|
Either way, both parties are going to essentially be in shambles. But it would be extra interesting if this was in the election year, the Iowa caucus was already finished, and now the main candidates from both parties are deceased.
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2016 17:17
|
|
|
They aren't going to play out in any realistic format how this would happen IRL. If you need that in a tv show watch Mr. Robot. We're gonna have kid/family drama, some insider who caused this and no one can figure it out, and people being dumb for no reason except drama. But we get Jack "Mother loving" Bauer. So that makes up for the dumb poo poo that is going to happen on an ABC tv show.
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2016 17:19
|
|
|
I doubt it's an actual election year, because that storyline (will Kirkman run?) is to juicy to waste in season 1 when you can still milk the original premise for all it's worth. My guess is that the election is still 20 month away, at which point it would make sense to think about reelection.
|
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2016 17:41
|
|
|
Holyshoot posted:They aren't going to play out in any realistic format how this would happen IRL. If you need that in a tv show watch Mr. Robot. We're gonna have kid/family drama, some insider who caused this and no one can figure it out, and people being dumb for no reason except drama. But we get Jack "Mother loving" Bauer. So that makes up for the dumb poo poo that is going to happen on an ABC tv show. I'm actually not quite sure what to make of this show in terms of whether it wants to be more West Wing or 24. Assuming it gets multiple seasons, I don't know if the focus would be on the political difficulties of having to rebuild a government while dealing with all the fallout, or if all that will take a backseat to a 24-style terrorist of the week plot. It will be interesting to watch as things settle out from the initial crisis.
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2016 17:58
|
|
|
Bucswabe posted:I'm actually not quite sure what to make of this show in terms of whether it wants to be more West Wing or 24. Assuming it gets multiple seasons, I don't know if the focus would be on the political difficulties of having to rebuild a government while dealing with all the fallout, or if all that will take a backseat to a 24-style terrorist of the week plot. Being on ABC and staring Jack Bauer I think it's safe to say it will go the 24 style.
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2016 18:12
|
|
|
GaussianCopula posted:I doubt it's an actual election year, because that storyline (will Kirkman run?) is to juicy to waste in season 1 when you can still milk the original premise for all it's worth. My guess is that the election is still 20 month away, at which point it would make sense to think about reelection. The real question is why the head of HUD would make any difference positive or negative on a re-election campaign to make it worth firing him. Maybe he just gave a speech about how Mexicans don't deserve any housing.
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2016 18:14
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 25, 2024 21:03 |
|
|
Synopsis of episode two. After the funerals, episode 2 of ABC’s “Designated Survivor” will show Alex Kirkman discover that her son is dealing drugs.  Elsewhere, FBI Agent Hannah Wells (Maggie Q) digs deeper to find answers. However, the most interesting part of the upcoming episode is Kirkman’s interview. A reporter asks him if he was almost fired before he became the President and if he was, does he agree that he isn’t suited to lead the country? He has to decide whether to admit he was almost fired and sow doubts in the minds of the people about his leadership or deny it. The end of episode 2 will see the White House under attack. Is this the second planned attack on the government?
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2016 18:16
|
|