Inheritance rights to the North in the show

[Error-504]

5 hours ago, AryaNymeriaVisenya said:

Robb wasn't voted King in the North. He was Torrhen's heir and so King when the North broke away from the seven Kingdoms.  Torrhen knelt, Robb rose. 

Electing Jon by passing over his trueborn sister is unprecedented. The Ironborn vote leaders, the North do not. This seems to have happened in the show because there is no will from Robb and its nonsense.

Jon was a King without a castle. Given power by his Lords and now they've opened the door to those Lords just choosing another monarch at any point. Succession stability has been undermined. The writers do not care about this however. The way I see it, they will ignore all this, bring out Jon's true heritage and they'll think that has fixed it. 

Yes he was. It happened much in the same way Jon was elected. prior to that there had not been a KotN for 300 years. 

[Error-504]

4 hours ago, Rose of Red Lake said:

Lyanna specifically said Ned Stark when she elected him. Rhaegar instead of Ned as the father is a huge liability. "A Targaryen cannot be trusted." And now Jon consorts with one!

Jon would never usurp his siblings so this is consistent with his book character. The king without a castle makes sense. Its also hilarious because he gave Dany something by giving her nothing. 

I think Jon is kept at arm's length from WF for plot reasons.

She said Ned Starks blood runs through his veins. Lyanna Stark is Ned's sister, so it is still true. Your assuming that would have made a difference, something you clearly don't know for a fact. Ned himself said "you have my blood running though your veins. 

[Error-504]

1 hour ago, Mystical said:

How is it nonsense? If Jon had inherited the King title, lets say via a will from Robb like in the books, the the North's hands would be tied. But that's not how Jon came to be KitN. He was voted into office which is very different from Robb for example (as the heir if the last King who was a Stark). So Jon only got his position via a vote, as nonsensical as a 10 year old shaming everybody into it might be. Jon decided to give said position up. That's fie for him to do, no doubt. But it also means that the North is well within it's rights to elect a new leader.

The North isn't smarter than me. I'm just not biased like some Dany/Jon stans who can't see the forest for the trees.

What the hell does it matter when there are female rulers ALL OVER the show even though they have no right to it? Cersei, Ellaria, Dany and Oleanna. The only reason Sansa is an exception, is that Jon Snowflake is tied up in her storyline and D&D are all about Jonny. It has nothing to do with how the North normally runs or history or anything like that. If Jon wasn't in that storyline, Sansa would have been Queen. Doesn't take a genius to realize that.

 

And if Jon wasn't in that storyline, Sansa would be dead, and Wf would still be Ramsay's. And it doesn't take a genius to realize that, either! Do you really think the Vale would have Liberated WF on thier own? Would Brienne even have been able to deliver Sansa to the Vale before Ramsay's men found them? No Jon Snow at the Wall, no safe haven for Sansa. No plan to rally the Nothern houses to aid in the liberation of Wf, And we already know what Lyanna thinks of Sansa. Your always conveniently leave out the parts of the story that discredit everything you say. In comparison, Sansa has done jack squat for the North, when compared to Jon. Her decision not to tell Jon about the Vale coming to their aid in the BotB's led to many unnecessary northern deaths. her willing marriage to Ramsay was outright treason. Stop white-washing Sansa's story line.

 

[Juligen]

2 hours ago, Error-504 said:

I've never had a problem with her being the Lady of WF, it's a role Jon clearly can't take, now can he? She is not however the KotN, nor will she ever marry Jon. 

Its QitN and no, she wont be the Queen of the North because she will be the Queen of Westeros; Its Arya who will be QitN.

[Error-504]

15 minutes ago, Juligen said:

Its QitN and no, she wont be the Queen of the North because she will be the Queen of Westeros; Its Arya who will be QitN.

How will she be queen of Westeros? Who will be king? 

[Juligen]

2 minutes ago, Error-504 said:

How will she be queen of Westeros? Who will be king? 

Jon Snow. I told you already.

[Error-504]

8 minutes ago, Juligen said:

Jon Snow. I told you already.

LMAO, this isn't going to happen.            

[AryaNymeriaVisenya]

15 hours ago, Error-504 said:

Yes he was. It happened much in the same way Jon was elected. prior to that there had not been a KotN for 300 years. 

Torrhen knelt and became a Lord, upon leaving the seven Kingdoms the Lord became the King again. That was the line of succession. They subverted the line of succession for Jon

[Error-504]

1 hour ago, AryaNymeriaVisenya said:

Torrhen knelt and became a Lord, upon leaving the seven Kingdoms the Lord became the King again. That was the line of succession. They subverted the line of succession for Jon

HUH? Rob was "elected" much in the same way Jon was. 

 

[Error-504]

On 4/2/2019 at 12:58 AM, Rose of Red Lake said:

So what I've learned on this thread: Calling Sansa Lady of Winterfell provokes REACTIONS. Any time I've mentioned the power that Sansa has with that position, I'm corrected for some strange reason.

It sounds like people are struggling to handle this advancement in Sansa's storyline and would rather she not be anywhere near Winterfell at all. This is strange because there are plenty of book hints that she will be Lady of Winterfell and even Queen of Westeros so it's really not that big of a deal. It just sounds like people had really low expectations for her and overestimated Robb's will. 

Regent: ruling through another wild/unruly child king.  

Lady of the Vale: ruling through a wild/unruly child king. 

That's the best you can come up with, as a "Sansa fan"?? Those are awful endgames and offer no narrative closure or catharsis. It sounds like underestimation and also rather mean. She can only rule through kid? A co-equal partnership like Jaehaerys/Alysanne is impossible for her?

Oh, excuse me - I'm reaching to far for this character - I must now discuss the finer details of how her illegal and unconsummated marriage to Tyrion has soiled her forever.

Her arc is about learning how to play her most valuable piece on the board, the key to the North. If she plays it right, she can get everything she wants - family, romantic love, safety, a good political match, Northern rights - with that play. It's great character growth if she can achieve that. She'd do what Robb couldn't.

As for Sandor. The author has mentioned in interviews that he never intended the Hound to be a dashing romantic figure and was surprised by the "SanSan kind of thing." It's not happening. Take a hint from the show. Or just re-read those scenes again and observe how its not romantic. 

JON SNOW: I’m having the lord’s chamber prepared for you.

SANSA: Mother and Father’s room? You should take it.

JON SNOW: I’m not a Stark.

SANSA: You are to me.

JON SNOW: You’re the Lady of Winterfell. You deserve it. We’re standing here because of you. The battle was lost until the Knights of the Vale rode in.

Lord/Lady of WF and KotN are different titles, as clearly shown here. Inheritance does not necessarily apply to KotN, whereas, Lord/Lady of Wf, it clearly does.  Pretty much makes the whole thread a mute point.. Jon hasn't taken the position of Lord of WF, Jon is the king of all the North. When Bran arrived at WF, Sansa didn't claim Bran was the KotN, she said he is the rightful Lord of WF, thus relinquishing her position as Lady of WF, however, Bran declined. 

[Mystical]

22 hours ago, Error-504 said:

And if Jon wasn't in that storyline, Sansa would be dead, and Wf would still be Ramsay's. And it doesn't take a genius to realize that, either! Do you really think the Vale would have Liberated WF on thier own? Would Brienne even have been able to deliver Sansa to the Vale before Ramsay's men found them? No Jon Snow at the Wall, no safe haven for Sansa. No plan to rally the Nothern houses to aid in the liberation of Wf, And we already know what Lyanna thinks of Sansa. Your always conveniently leave out the parts of the story that discredit everything you say. In comparison, Sansa has done jack squat for the North, when compared to Jon. Her decision not to tell Jon about the Vale coming to their aid in the BotB's led to many unnecessary northern deaths. her willing marriage to Ramsay was outright treason. Stop white-washing Sansa's story line.

Haha. You keep repeating the same nonsense over and over. Isn't that tiring? And don't accuse me of things you yourself are guilty of. It's not a good look. Jon was just like Sansa, he didn't do squat to rally the North. Something I have mentioned before. Davos and Tormund did all the convincing, something you conveniently forget all the time.

And who cares what Lyanna thinks of Sansa? Seriously? A walking meme, that's your defense? From a house with a population so small they can't even muster up 100 men for a fight? She wasn't interested in helping the rightful Stark heir (something you ignore all the time btw). What she thinks of Sansa (or Jon) is irrelevant. She had no desire to help Rickon, her rightful STARK KING, so her opinions matter little.

And it would have made little difference whether Sansa told Jon about the Vale. Why? Because Jon would still have been a grade A moron with grade A moronic generals. The only thing that might have gone differently is the Vale troops being smart enough not to storm after Jon. It would have still meant massive casualties in Jon's army. Hell, any general smart enough would have outfitted their best weapon, a giant, to the best of their ability. Wun Wun could have solo curb stomped half of Ramsey's forces if he had protective gear and a weapon. And that might have saved the majority Jon's troops, Vale or no Vale. Or if Jon had waited to hear from Brienne, White Harbor or contacted any of the houses in the North that Sansa mentioned instead of wanting to fight when he did. But sure, lets blame Sansa for Jon's stupidity which is what got his men killed.

[Error-504]

1 hour ago, Mystical said:

Haha. You keep repeating the same nonsense over and over. Isn't that tiring? And don't accuse me of things you yourself are guilty of. It's not a good look. Jon was just like Sansa, he didn't do squat to rally the North. Something I have mentioned before. Davos and Tormund did all the convincing, something you conveniently forget all the time.

And who cares what Lyanna thinks of Sansa? Seriously? A walking meme, that's your defense? From a house with a population so small they can't even muster up 100 men for a fight? She wasn't interested in helping the rightful Stark heir (something you ignore all the time btw). What she thinks of Sansa (or Jon) is irrelevant. She had no desire to help Rickon, her rightful STARK KING, so her opinions matter little.

And it would have made little difference whether Sansa told Jon about the Vale. Why? Because Jon would still have been a grade A moron with grade A moronic generals. The only thing that might have gone differently is the Vale troops being smart enough not to storm after Jon. It would have still meant massive casualties in Jon's army. Hell, any general smart enough would have outfitted their best weapon, a giant, to the best of their ability. Wun Wun could have solo curb stomped half of Ramsey's forces if he had protective gear and a weapon. And that might have saved the majority Jon's troops, Vale or no Vale. Or if Jon had waited to hear from Brienne, White Harbor or contacted any of the houses in the North that Sansa mentioned instead of wanting to fight when he did. But sure, lets blame Sansa for Jon's stupidity which is what got his men killed.

Face it, Sansa is an idiot. LF's puppet up until the end of season 7, when she finally gets a clue, thanks to Bran. 

Lyanna a meme? Lol, I guess you missed the part where she shamed the northern houses to support Jon. And what she thinks of Sansa is very relevant. 

Your not being able to see what difference it would have made if Sansa were to have informed Jon of the Vale forces being on there way is proof of your complete lack of any understanding. Enough said. Jon could have died as  result of Sansa's ignorance. As a matter of fact, Jon should have died. 

 

She betrayed Jon letting her brother and thousands of Stark loyalists die.

Nice one sansa

[Mystical]

19 hours ago, Error-504 said:

Face it, Sansa is an idiot. LF's puppet up until the end of season 7, when she finally gets a clue, thanks to Bran.

Not according to D&D. Are you suddenly saying the guys who you always defend were wrong? We only have Isaacs interpretation on what the scene meant in the grand scheme of things. According to D&D, Sansa and Arya were working together long before then, even if that wasn't in the scripts. So D&D are wrong but only when it suits your POV? So canon is what YOU want it to be then? That scene was not in the show, hence it means nothing because it's not part of canon.

19 hours ago, Error-504 said:

Lyanna a meme? Lol, I guess you missed the part where she shamed the northern houses to support Jon. And what she thinks of Sansa is very relevant.

I don't get around much on social media but even I have seen the massive meme machine surrounding Lyanna Mormont. Do you deny reality now? And a 10 year old girl from one of the smallest houses shaming grow men into something...that IS a MEME. What she thinks of Sansa is relevant only in so far as Lyanna being an utter misogynist. Lyanna is basically book Cersei in that regard.

20 hours ago, Error-504 said:

Your not being able to see what difference it would have made if Sansa were to have informed Jon of the Vale forces being on there way is proof of your complete lack of any understanding. Enough said. Jon could have died as  result of Sansa's ignorance. As a matter of fact, Jon should have died.

Not enough said. Vale or no Vale doesn't change Jon as a character. It would change nothing about what he did in that situation. Vale or nor Vale Jon should have died because of HIS actions. Why is that so hard to understand? Even if he knew about the Vale, things would have still played out exactly the same. Jon would have still refused to wait for replies from other houses, he would still have refused to go to more houses (like Cerwyn which is literally right next door to WF), he would have still not followed through on his own plan (like digging trenches), too stupid to outfit his biggest weapon and screwed up by charging head first into Ramsey's forces.

20 hours ago, Error-504 said:

She betrayed Jon letting her brother and thousands of Stark loyalists die.

Not according to the show. No one in the show sees it as a betrayal. So what's your point? Fanon? It sure ain't a canon argument. And why do you suddenly care about the Northern Lords and their armies dying? Aren't you calling them stupid and say they deserve to die because they aren't happy with Jon's decisions? And that includes your precious Lyanna Mormont. Make up your mind, please.

What is it with you Jon stans anyway? What exactly are you complaining about? Thanks to Sansa, your darling Jonny got EVERYTHING. And Sansa got nothing. Shouldn't you be doing the happy dance instead of still complaining about the few things he doesn't have?

What did Jon get out of Sansa coming to CB?

He got a Kingship, he met the love of his life (supposedly), he will be a godly hero after the war with the Others, he will be a dragon rider, he will know his true parentage and probably become King of Westeros. And you still complain about the Northern Lords or Sansa?

If Sansa hadn't come to CB and was the one who insisted to take back WF, none of the above would have happened for Jon. You realize that, right? Jon had planned to go south. At worst he wouldn't have made it past the North, someone might have recognized him and he would be executed as a NW deserter. If he did make it south, he would have died with everyone else once the NK found a way through or around the wall. Even if he went all the way to Essos, the Others would eventually get there too.

What did Sansa get out of it? Nothing really. She got to be Lady of WF but that's only because Bran abdicated. But that's null and void now anyway since Jon handed the North to Dany, so Sansa is back to square one where her fate is in the hand of a Southern ruler.

Your darling little Snowflake got everything handed to him by the writers and you still complain? It's truly baffling.

[Error-504]

37 minutes ago, Mystical said:

Not according to D&D. Are you suddenly saying the guys who you always defend were wrong? We only have Isaacs interpretation on what the scene meant in the grand scheme of things. According to D&D, Sansa and Arya were working together long before then, even if that wasn't in the scripts. So D&D are wrong but only when it suits your POV? So canon is what YOU want it to be then? That scene was not in the show, hence it means nothing because it's not part of canon.

I don't get around much on social media but even I have seen the massive meme machine surrounding Lyanna Mormont. Do you deny reality now? And a 10 year old girl from one of the smallest houses shaming grow men into something...that IS a MEME. What she thinks of Sansa is relevant only in so far as Lyanna being an utter misogynist. Lyanna is basically book Cersei in that regard.

Not enough said. Vale or no Vale doesn't change Jon as a character. It would change nothing about what he did in that situation. Vale or nor Vale Jon should have died because of HIS actions. Why is that so hard to understand? Even if he knew about the Vale, things would have still played out exactly the same. Jon would have still refused to wait for replies from other houses, he would still have refused to go to more houses (like Cerwyn which is literally right next door to WF), he would have still not followed through on his own plan (like digging trenches), too stupid to outfit his biggest weapon and screwed up by charging head first into Ramsey's forces.

Not according to the show. No one in the show sees it as a betrayal. So what's your point? Fanon? It sure ain't a canon argument. And why do you suddenly care about the Northern Lords and their armies dying? Aren't you calling them stupid and say they deserve to die because they aren't happy with Jon's decisions? And that includes your precious Lyanna Mormont. Make up your mind, please.

What is it with you Jon stans anyway? What exactly are you complaining about? Thanks to Sansa, your darling Jonny got EVERYTHING. And Sansa got nothing. Shouldn't you be doing the happy dance instead of still complaining about the few things he doesn't have?

What did Jon get out of Sansa coming to CB?

He got a Kingship, he met the love of his life (supposedly), he will be a godly hero after the war with the Others, he will be a dragon rider, he will know his true parentage and probably become King of Westeros. And you still complain about the Northern Lords or Sansa?

If Sansa hadn't come to CB and was the one who insisted to take back WF, none of the above would have happened for Jon. You realize that, right? Jon had planned to go south. At worst he wouldn't have made it past the North, someone might have recognized him and he would be executed as a NW deserter. If he did make it south, he would have died with everyone else once the NK found a way through or around the wall. Even if he went all the way to Essos, the Others would eventually get there too.

What did Sansa get out of it? Nothing really. She got to be Lady of WF but that's only because Bran abdicated. But that's null and void now anyway since Jon handed the North to Dany, so Sansa is back to square one where her fate is in the hand of a Southern ruler.

Your darling little Snowflake got everything handed to him by the writers and you still complain? It's truly baffling.

Not according to D&D. Are you suddenly saying the guys who you always defend were wrong? We only have Isaacs interpretation on what the scene meant in the grand scheme of things. According to D&D, Sansa and Arya were working together long before then, even if that wasn't in the scripts. So D&D are wrong but only when it suits your POV? So canon is what YOU want it to be then? That scene was not in the show, hence it means nothing because it's not part of canon.

So your saying she was only an idiot prior to season 7 then? That's your argument? LMAO

I don't get around much on social media but even I have seen the massive meme machine surrounding Lyanna Mormont. Do you deny reality now? And a 10 year old girl from one of the smallest houses shaming grow men into something...that IS a MEME. What she thinks of Sansa is relevant only in so far as Lyanna being an utter misogynist. Lyanna is basically book Cersei in that regard.

So there are a lot of Lyanna Mormont memes? So what ??!!  Deny reality? What reality exactly? That she has the ability to sway the other heads of Northern Houses to her opinion? No, there is no denying that, we have seen it multiple times now. And yeah, that is exactly what makes what she thinks about Sansa, relevant. Can I put down my crayons now, or do I still need to draw easy to understand pictures for you? 

Not according to the show. No one in the show sees it as a betrayal. So what's your point? Fanon? It sure ain't a canon argument.

You cant say no one in the show sees it as a betrayal, as we do not even know if anyone other than Jon even knows the particulars pertaining to when/how the Vale became involved. Jon did have a conversation with Sansa about the whole ordeal. 

And why do you suddenly care about the Northern Lords and their armies dying? Aren't you calling them stupid and say they deserve to die because they aren't happy with Jon's decisions? And that includes your precious Lyanna Mormont. Make up your mind, please.

Nope, I guess I have to get out my crayons again, it's quite obvious reading comprehension isn't your strong suit. I never said the Northern Houses were stupid. What I said, and read this carefully, that is IF some of the widespread speculation pertaining to their reaction of Jon bending the knee to Dany being tossed about on this site comes to fruition, then, (I know this is hard for you) and only then, would they be idiots. However, while I do think there will be some grumbling about it, in no way do I think it will be as big a deal as some seem to assume it will be. Ergo they would not be idiots. So, instead of me making up my mind, why don't you try using yours. 

What is it with you Jon stans anyway? What exactly are you complaining about? Thanks to Sansa, your darling Jonny got EVERYTHING. And Sansa got nothing. Shouldn't you be doing the happy dance instead of still complaining about the few things he doesn't have?

And this is what I find really funny. It's proof positive your totally clueless. In matters pertaining to Jon, I am defending the show itself from trolls like yourself, that have nothing better to do that come to a fan site of a particular show, and bash it. Man, you are so cool! LMAO. If I had to pick my favorite two characters, it would be Bronn and Jamie. Jon might be a distant 4th or 5th, Sansa would most assuredly be at the bottom of the list. And for the record, this has nothing to do with the actors that portray them, or there acting ability. 

What did Jon get out of Sansa coming to CB?

He got a Kingship, he met the love of his life (supposedly), he will be a godly hero after the war with the Others, he will be a dragon rider, he will know his true parentage and probably become King of Westeros. And you still complain about the Northern Lords or Sansa?

All of this assumes none of this would have happened if Sansa did not come to CB. That discussion in and of itself, pages could be written on what may or may not have happened. To assume none of it would have is nonsense. 

What did Sansa get out of it? Nothing really. She got to be Lady of WF but that's only because Bran abdicated. But that's null and void now anyway since Jon handed the North to Dany, so Sansa is back to square one where her fate is in the hand of a Southern ruler.

What did Sansa get out if it? Her life, for one. Are you saying that she deserves more than to be Lady of Winterfell? What more is there for her? Sansa's fate was always going to be in the hands of a Southern ruler, so this is a mute point. Do you think without Jon  she could have rallied the North, defeated the WW's, and then won a war against whichever southern ruler was in place? I have a quarter, you can buy a clue with it, neither Dany or Cersei, or Euron was going to grant the North their independence. Jon's bending the knee to Dany gave them the best and brightest future they could have hoped for under the circumstances Jon was facing. 

[Error-504]

Not enough said. Vale or no Vale doesn't change Jon as a character. It would change nothing about what he did in that situation. Vale or nor Vale Jon should have died because of HIS actions. Why is that so hard to understand? Even if he knew about the Vale, things would have still played out exactly the same. Jon would have still refused to wait for replies from other houses, he would still have refused to go to more houses (like Cerwyn which is literally right next door to WF), he would have still not followed through on his own plan (like digging trenches), too stupid to outfit his biggest weapon and screwed up by charging head first into Ramsey's forces.

This part is the biggest load of crapola of the whole stinkfest you posted. with knowledge of the Vale, some of the other houses (Cerywin/Glover/Manderly) most likely would have come to Jon's aid. Their biggest fear was fighting in a battle they didn't think they could win. Lyanna calls them out for "not answering the call", which quite clearly indicates Jon knew they were not going to come to their aid. Blackfish was never going to come, he was pre-occupied with his own war. 

Ramsay, having to face a far superior and bigger army, no longer kills Rickon, as he would see the value in saving him as a bargaining chip should he loose the battle. The Karstarks and Umbers, under these circumstances, might defect from Ramsay's forces. 

Saying Jon would have done the same thing in that situation is short sighted, as that situation would have never happened in the first place. Depending on Jon's battle plan, Ramsay might not have ever left the walls of WF, and just like he sees the value of Sansa, he would also see the value of Rickon being left alive. 

So, Sansa's failure to let Jon know about the Vale forces was the absolutely most idiotic thing she could have done. She put her half brother and full brother's lives at great risk, ultimately costing Rickon his life, to insure she could have revenge on Ramsay. 

[Lollygag]

Sophie Turner was asked at a ComicCon panel about why Sansa didn't tell Jon about the Vale knights. She asked D&D because she didn't know. They didn't have an answer. The characters were thrown under the bus to get the last minute save shot because...COOOLLLLL! More creatively it made sense because we wanted to do it or whatever nonsense. 

[Error-504]

From the three minute mark:

Jon knows the blackfish isn't coming, he knows the other houses aren't coming, he asks Sansa, "where are we going to get more men"? She says nothing. 

[Mystical]

11 hours ago, Error-504 said:

From the three minute mark:

Jon knows the blackfish isn't coming, he knows the other houses aren't coming, he asks Sansa, "where are we going to get more men"? She says nothing. 

Lets ignore 6x07 then because it doesn't help our argument. Go figure.

[Rose of Red Lake]

On 4/4/2019 at 6:58 AM, Error-504 said:

Lord/Lady of WF and KotN are different titles, as clearly shown here. Inheritance does not necessarily apply to KotN, whereas, Lord/Lady of Wf, it clearly does.  Pretty much makes the whole thread a mute point.. Jon hasn't taken the position of Lord of WF, Jon is the king of all the North. When Bran arrived at WF, Sansa didn't claim Bran was the KotN, she said he is the rightful Lord of WF, thus relinquishing her position as Lady of WF, however, Bran declined. 

You're basically repeating my first post that opened the thread. My post that you're replying to is about how other folks simply saw her as a regent for a bratty kid and not even Lady of WF in her own right. 

 

[Error-504]

1 hour ago, Rose of Red Lake said:

You're basically repeating my first post that opened the thread. My post that you're replying to is about how other folks simply saw her as a regent for a bratty kid and not even Lady of WF in her own right. 

 

Before R+L=J, Sansa is officially Lady of Winterfell. Jon is King in the North without a seat. He and Sansa co-rule.

^^I am agreeing with you on that point, is it not allowed? ^^

However. for comparison's sake, Jon is more akin to president, whereas Sansa is like a Governor. Jon's "seat" is  wherever he decides to "sit". 

After R+L=J reveal, Jon is a male cousin with a claim elsewhere, and Sansa's claim is even more powerful now if Bran continues to abdicate. Jon is NOT the son of the Lord of Winterfell. Sansa is the eldest daughter.

More powerful in what regard? Jon still holds more power over Sansa, but he really never had a legitimate claim to WF (unless you want to talk about Rob's will, which is book only). 

Sansa controls the North and Jon is no longer king. Furthermore, Winterfell wasn't his to give since it wasn't his seat.

No, Jon is king of the North, Period. Sansa does not control the north, Jon does. Nothing about the reveal changes that fact. The only thing that would change it is a meeting of the ruling houses of the North, and for them to decide they no longer wanted Jon as king. Jon never "gave" WF to Sansa, he only pointed out it was hers. 

Jon's claim to the North as Lyanna's son only comes into play when ALL his cousins are dead. Nobody can want that.

Jon's claim to the North comes from the fact he was elected (town council meeting style) to the position. Sansa has no claim to the North, only WF. It's a bit up in the air if the Northern houses still hold a pledge of fealty to house Stark at all, in light of recent events.