oh yeah, forgot they was the one making the calls to the door places, from the office, for whatever reason

ya so possible the whole scheme gets worked out eventually, and then like i said Jimmy takes the fall for it

You don't understand why she was calling those numbers?

ya, that's it

At this point I'm starting to think that Kim eventually gets disbarred and that destroys her and Jimmy's relationship.

Jimmy becomes Saul and continues on while Kim has to give up her passion.

Chuck probably orchestrates it after failing to get Jimmy disbarred and likely getting censured himself as a way to really hurt Jimmy.

Saul Goodman is a lawyer. That makes it kinda unlikely that Jimmy is getting disbarred now or takes a fall for Kim that results in disbarment.

If one of the two loses their license to practice law, odds are it's going to be Kim.

I don't think that really validates it. At best it tells us that Hector thinks Gus and Max are more than just business associates.

I'm not saying that theory is wrong, I'm just say we need more than Hector's remark to be certain.

Was this Bolsa guy in BB?

Yes. Gus deals with him a decent amount in the show. He's there to mediate the meeting with Gus about Tucos nephews, the cartel war with Gus etc.

if it comes to that, then yeah almost certainly

Bolsa is the guy who restrains Gus when Hector shoots Max at Don Eladio's pool.

That might be one of the reasons Gus is not Hectors biggest fan in BCS.

They make it at least look like Gus is gay. But maybe we'll find out about that eventually?

I didn't realize it was a question

If we could get this much Gustavo screen time moving forward I'm sure I would stop thinking this show is a shadow of its former iteration.

No, Kim doesn't need to legally record anything. Chuck will never lie under oath, so they can just ask him.

This is my theory I posted elsewhere and am pretty proud of, I will expand on it here. IANAL, but I thought it was pretty clear that the "Bingo" referred to Chuck admitting it wasn't his property Jimmy destroyed, only damaged, because the original still existed, therefore rendering their modified and initialed agreement void. Basically they gambled on Chuck's attention to detail to challenge that one clause which is why they showed them modifying it. Now the entire PPD is null and void.

The threat that Chuck himself lied might be enough to make him withdraw from using the tape. He might be subject to sanctions himself for lying to the police or in the PPD hearing, or reputation damage.

Since the PPD is void, they can revert to a trial. But now Mike has gathered evidence for that eventuality, which means they have a great advantage in settlement negotiations. Even his comment "looks like they went after your copper wire", sounded like it was added to provide plausible doubt that Jimmy did the felony break in.

The result will probably be a negotiation to fully restituted misdemeanor charge (Jimmy's $323.98 payment, and his requesting assurance from Mike that there wouldn't be any complaints about the workmanship) leaving Jimmy fully able to practice law.

Good post Ballyhoo.

1. how are the original and copy both not Chuck's protected property?

2. there were 2 witnesses (Howard and the other guy) to Jimmy's break-in, so he's not going to weasel his way out of that one because Mike fixed the door.

It's an interesting theory but I think it's wrong.

Kim was proofreading the statement and she suggested the change to damaged from destroyed and said 'maybe we can get away with that.' She would've had to come up with that whole plan on the fly including Chuck's insistence on changing the language back.

Plus as the previous post points out, if you have 2 copies of some property and one of them gets incapacitated, is there going to be a big legal distinction that property was damaged and not destroyed? What if I had 2 extremely valuable copies of a painting and someone slashed one of them up? I still have the other copy so my property wasn't destroyed?

Certainly Chuck would have no culpability over that even if a judge ruled along those lines. Taken together I think it's too much of a stretch.

1. Only half was damaged (the one Jimmy ate), so it is "damaged" not "destroyed"

The property isn't the recording. The property is the cassette. Even if Jimmy smashed a blank cassette he would have *destroyed* that cassette. The fact that Chuck had another cassette or a whole carton of other cassettes is irrelevant. The contents of the tape and whether there is a copy of the contents is only relevant to what amount of equitable restitution compensates for its destruction.

Season 3 has been decidedly lackluster for me so far, and it's already 40% over. I think they're overplaying the stylized cutesy ****.

I think they would use the ignore function if that was so.

Kim is kinda more like Chuck in that her legal career is sacred and distinct from the bar hustles. If you recall that clever peeing in a pie defense, Kim was appalled to hear that Jimmy lies to the cops as well as marks.

I think the more likely outcome is Kim runs back into the legal establishment and divorces Saul. However it would be a good future season if Kim became the white collar Saul.

They aren't married.

So far, I'd say season 3 > season 2 > season 1. And season 1 was really good.

Show is riveting.

Don't exaggerate. He sit's on the pie...and squirms...and cries.

http://www.urbandictionary.com/defin...quat%20Cobbler

This dovetails with a theory floated in an earlier season.

Chuck started recovering from his Electro-Magnetic Allergies when he was brilliant in applying in the law in the Sandpiper Crossing case. This led to speculation that the onset of his Mental Illness was caused by some instance of bad Lawyering or where he otherwise violated the Law. Were Jimmy to outsmart him and get him caught in a lie or guilty of some other ethics violation that leads to him to getting reprimanded by the BA, the theory holds that this would cause Chuck to go into full on meltdown mode.

So we've had Chicago sunroof in S1 and Squat Cobbler in S2. Wonder what S3 will bring