The West Wing: The Mythology Eps

[Gaith]

Hoynes was part of the MS cover up, he knew from the beginning, he even sanctioned it by agreeing to become VP. So wouldn't he be part of the fallout as well?!?

There'd be some fallout, yes, but a) President Hoynes wouldn't have to battle MS, and b) an entirely new ticket would likely be more hassle than it'd be worth.

Of course, it'd be much easier for Democratic hopefuls to challenge Hoynes than Bartlet in the primaries, so maybe they're not siding with Hoynes so much as hoping to clear the field.

I don't quite agree that the shooting screws up Josh for more than Noel.

Agreed. As Keyworth says, he gets better.

As for the listing:

7x20 The Last Hurrah - introduces Vinick as Santos' secretary of state.

Ooh, good call - finished the election arc.

Sorkin I think is happy that NBC fired him, because that's when he cleaned up his act and stopped the drinking and the drugs. So there is a good chance NBC saved his life (he probably would have had a heart attack).

The official line everyone sticks to (AFAIK) is that he wasn't fired per se, the studio just demanded on-time scripts as a means to curb cost overruns, which Sorkin couldn't do without delegating more work than he was comfortable with. If true, interpret that how you will, I suppose...

 

[CaptainCanada]

The one thing about the shooting that I don't quite understand is that there was no follow-up concerning perhaps changing the wording of the part of the consitution ruling over the succession if the president is incapacitated and didn't sign such a letter to give over powers to the VP. What if Bartlet had been unconscious before the surgery? He'd never have had the opportunity of signing a letter. And I also don't quite understand why having such a presigned letter lying around somewhere would point to Bartlet's MS, as "17 people" is suggesting when Toby brings up the issue. It's just needed for such an extreme situation like the shooting - and given the wording of the law, such a letter is needed...

There isn't a need for a presigned letter; if the president is incapacitated, all that has to happen is for the Vice President and the Cabinet to vote to temporarily devolve the Acting Presidency to the Veep (and, in practice, if the president was unconscious, the government wouldn't wait for the formalities to start doing what the vice president said).

 

[Claudia]

The current line of succession took place around 1945. Since then no president (that we know of) had a letter in the Oval Office drawer. So if Bartlet did people would then wonder why he did. JFK was most likely killed instantly as half of his head was blown off, however he wasn't instantly called dead. So there was a time in the 1960s, during the height of the cold war where no one was technically running the country. It's just the way the stupid laws are written.

1. - no president that we know of... Since none of them, except for Kennedy, actually needed such a letter - and for him/Johnson the line of succession was clear in the 20th (?) amendment because he died, so he wouldn't have needed such a letter anyway -, it's a moot question whether anybody knows of it or not. Well, they could all have had such letters somewhere lying around and just not told anyone but their most trusted advisors who perhaps didn't feel inclined to share that knowledge with the public (hence, the not that we know of part)...

2. - in the fictional TWW-world, the problem was clear after the shooting. And still Bartlet didn't have such a letter at the ready? Or initiate some talk about changing the wording of that law/amendment? That has nothing to do with the MS, just with common sense in the aftermath of the shooting.

There isn't a need for a presigned letter; if the president is incapacitated, all that has to happen is for the Vice President and the Cabinet to vote to temporarily devolve the Acting Presidency to the Veep (and, in practice, if the president was unconscious, the government wouldn't wait for the formalities to start doing what the vice president said).

You just replied while I was writing my post. *g*

That's an interesting point - so, why wasn't that mentioned in ITSOTG? Would have avoided all those "who's in command"-issues!

 

[bigdaddy]

1. - no president that we know of... Since none of them, except for Kennedy, actually needed such a letter - and for him/Johnson the line of succession was clear in the 20th (?) amendment because he died, so he wouldn't have needed such a letter anyway -, it's a moot question whether anybody knows of it or not. Well, they could all have had such letters somewhere lying around and just not told anyone but their most trusted advisors who perhaps didn't feel inclined to share that knowledge with the public (hence, the not that we know of part)...

Wow you are completely missing the point.

First of JFK was killed instantly, however that wasn't reported, there was some time before it was official that the president was dead. Who was running the country then? Constitutionally probably no one, but in time of need no one cares about a piece of paper.

Second you just proved everyone else point. If you have a letter in a drawer and need to use it, EVERYONE will start asking why that president had a letter, did he see the need for one for what reason and yadda yadda. It's just better not to keep a letter because in a real time of need no one will really give a damn if the president signed a letter.

 

[Gaith]

The point is, they made a big deal of the letter/presidential power controversy to make it seem as if the GOP just might have valid grounds for starting an impeachment process. Of course, the real-life GOP needed no substantial grounds, and its leadership actually prevented any kind of censure vote in order to push forward with impeachment, and then told their own members who'd wanted to only censure Clinton that since they couldn't do that, they might as well vote to impeach as the next best thing.

But, TWW isn't as ruthless towards Republican pols' dignity and integrity as actual Republicans are to themselves.

 

[CaptainCanada]

That's an interesting point - so, why wasn't that mentioned in ITSOTG? Would have avoided all those "who's in command"-issues!

The answer is in the question: Sorkin wanted to do some drama (and, probably, to have Leo running things instead of Hoynes), so he created ambiguities where none exist. He also dragged out the idea(also seen in the movie Air Force One) that in a military crisis situation there's some ambiguity about whether the VP or the Secretary of Defense is authorized to act as president, which is likewise nonsense: executive power descends very clearly, and without situational variation, to the Vice President, thence to the Speaker, etc.

 

[Claudia]

]The answer is in the question: Sorkin wanted to do some drama (and, probably, to have Leo running things instead of Hoynes), so he created ambiguities where none exist. He also dragged out the idea(also seen in the movie Air Force One) that in a military crisis situation there's some ambiguity about whether the VP or the Secretary of Defense is authorized to act as president, which is likewise nonsense: executive power descends very clearly, and without situational variation, to the Vice President, thence to the Speaker, etc.

Okay, thanks for the clarification. I'm not from the US, so I have no real insight into their consitution - and while I'm not prone to take what I see on TV at face value, I wouldn't have guessed that on such an important issue, Sorkin'd take quite such artistic license. *g* So, thanks again for setting my mind at peace.

And yes, I did have my problems with Air Force One - in such a situation there should be absolutely no doubt that not the president who has a gun pointed at his head or his family is in charge, but someone with a relatively clear mind.

First of JFK was killed instantly, however that wasn't reported, there was some time before it was official that the president was dead. Who was running the country then? Constitutionally probably no one, but in time of need no one cares about a piece of paper.

I wasn't missing your point - I just thought that the example of JFK wasn't what we were talking about... since JFK died, Bartlet didn't (and was in no danger to). And no matter the timing of the declaraction of JFK's death, his succession wasn't in any doubt. That was my point - in his case (and to just follow up on what has been clarified to me above - and any RL's case) any kind of letter wouldn't have been needed. But you're right, of course, I'd like to know who was actually running the country for that 1 hour between the shooting and the announcement back in 1963.

The letter in Bartlet's case or in the fictional TWW-world was only needed when Bartlet didn't die but was otherwise incapacitated. That was the point of the discussion in ITSOTG.

Second you just proved everyone else point. If you have a letter in a drawer and need to use it, EVERYONE will start asking why that president had a letter, did he see the need for one for what reason and yadda yadda. It's just better not to keep a letter because in a real time of need no one will really give a damn if the president signed a letter.

Again, I'm talking about the fictional world of TWW, not the real world (as they apparently don't interpret the legal basics quite in the same way. *g*). And in that world it would have made sense.

 

[Gaith]

What's this?! We can't leave out 7x07: The Debate!

 

[Sci]

That's an interesting point - so, why wasn't that mentioned in ITSOTG? Would have avoided all those "who's in command"-issues!

The answer is in the question: Sorkin wanted to do some drama (and, probably, to have Leo running things instead of Hoynes), so he created ambiguities where none exist.

That's not exactly accurate, though.

When Reagan was under after having been hit by a would-be assassin's bullet, then-Vice President Bush wasn't the one running the show. Instead, then-Secretary of State Alexander Haig asserted that he was in charge, saying, rather infamously:

Constitutionally, gentlemen, you have the President, the Vice President and the Secretary of State in that order, and should the President decide he wants to transfer the helm to the Vice President, he will do so. He has not done that. As of now, I am in control here, in the White House, pending return of the Vice President and in close touch with him. If something came up, I would check with him, of course.

Seems to me that Leo giving the orders the night of Bartlet's surgery is a reference both to the fact that, historically, the right of the Cabinet to vote for the Vice President to assume the Acting Presidency has never been used (as they're apparently loathe to do so, period), and to Secretary Haig's "taking control" during the Reagan crisis.

He also dragged out the idea(also seen in the movie Air Force One) that in a military crisis situation there's some ambiguity about whether the VP or the Secretary of Defense is authorized to act as president, which is likewise nonsense: executive power descends very clearly, and without situational variation, to the Vice President, thence to the Speaker, etc.

Erm, no. Not exactly. The film Air Force One was actually quite right in its depiction of things: Unless the Vice President as assumed the Acting Presidency under the 25th Amendment or has become the President, the Vice President has no authority to issue any orders to the Secretary of Defense whatsoever.

Yes, the presidential succession list is very clearly defined, but it's not clearly defined who's in charge if the President is unable to discharge his/her duties or is out of communication in a crisis yet the Cabinet is unable or unwilling to vote for the Vice President to assume the Acting Presidency.

Wow you are completely missing the point.

First of JFK was killed instantly, however that wasn't reported, there was some time before it was official that the president was dead. Who was running the country then? Constitutionally probably no one, but in time of need no one cares about a piece of paper

Constitutionally, the instant John Kennedy died, Lyndon Johnson became President.

Now, yeah, sure, there would have been a brief period of time before this fact would have been clear to everyone, but asking, "Who was running the country?" during the all of -- what, a half-hour or hour? -- it took to determine and communicate that Kennedy was dead and Johnson should take the Oath of Office is a bit like asking, "Who's running the country when the President is asleep at night?"

Johnson was President, but no one was exercising the duties of the President during that brief period of time, because, well, there are numerous times throughout the course of a single day where no one is exercising the duties of the President because there are no Presidential duties to be exercised. No one's exercising the duties of the President when he's asleep in the Residence, either, yet the country doesn't fall apart.

Countries don't require constant manual operation.

 

[137th Gebirg]

Man I miss this show. One of the few political dramas that appealed to both sides of the political spectrum, despite it's left-of-center leanings. The writing was always fantastic. Kinda wish they continued with the new presidency, although I would have preferred Alan Alda in there. He was able to capture the soul of a moderate conservative without being too over-the-top and I really liked his staff, too. Maybe someday...

 

[bigdaddy]

Sci, Kennedy wasn't sleeping, he had his head blown off. For all we know it could have been the Russians, so 30-60 minutes is a long time. Plus what if Kennedy was only brain dead? Not quite dead and then the VP would be powerless during a time when we could be under attack.

 

[Gaith]

As much as I've loved and still do love the show, seven years of its uber-idealized, nearly corporation-free sanitized vision of American politics was enough, particularly when the Bush years finally, mercifully ended. In the Obama era, it's time to put fantasies aside...

I would have preferred Alan Alda in there. He was able to capture the soul of a moderate conservative without being too over-the-top

case in point...

But I'm drifting from the OP, aren't I?

 

[Marten]

Sci, Kennedy wasn't sleeping, he had his head blown off. For all we know it could have been the Russians, so 30-60 minutes is a long time. Plus what if Kennedy was only brain dead? Not quite dead and then the VP would be powerless during a time when we could be under attack.

If the russians attacked, I'm fairly certain someone would have the guts to shoot back. If not the VP, then someone else with authority.

 

[bigdaddy]

Sci, Kennedy wasn't sleeping, he had his head blown off. For all we know it could have been the Russians, so 30-60 minutes is a long time. Plus what if Kennedy was only brain dead? Not quite dead and then the VP would be powerless during a time when we could be under attack.

If the russians attacked, I'm fairly certain someone would have the guts to shoot back. If not the VP, then someone else with authority.

Well then we have World War 3 and a civil war!

 

[Marten]

If you are going down, it's always better to drag others with you.

 

[Sci]

Sci, Kennedy wasn't sleeping, he had his head blown off.

Really? Are you sure? That's a fairly obscure historical fact.

For all we know it could have been the Russians, so 30-60 minutes is a long time.

What's your point?

Yes, a half-hour to an hour where no one is clearly executing the duties of the presidency can seem like a long time in a potential crisis, but the fact remains that if no duties have to be executed, the country does not fall apart.

Constitutionally, the instant Kennedy died, Johnson became President. It took people a little bit of time to realize that -- and, by the way, I doubt it even took them a half-hour to determine and communicate that Kennedy was dead, but that's besides the point -- but so what? It's not like the country requires constant manual operation. It's not a goddamn car in motion.

Plus what if Kennedy was only brain dead? Not quite dead and then the VP would be powerless during a time when we could be under attack.

This is where constitutionality gives way to reality. No one's going to sit around and wait to determine whether Kennedy is dead or merely incapacitated; no one's going to wait for the Cabinet to transmit to the President Pro Tempore of the Senate and the Speaker of the House their judgement that the President is incapacitated and that the Vice President should assume the office of Acting President. They're just going to follow the Vice President's orders, or, barring that, the orders of the Secretary of Defense or of another high-ranking person. It's really that simple.

That's what happened when Reagan was shot and Bush Sr. wasn't in communication; people started doing what Haig told them until the crisis was over. Hell, I seem to remember reading that during some brief periods when W. Bush was out of contact with Washington on 9/11, the Pentagon was taking orders from Cheney.

People aren't going to sit around and wait for the letter of the law to catch up to reality if there's a crisis that requires immediate action.