MovieChat Forums > The West Wing (1999) Discussion > Toby was never more right than in the ep...

Toby was never more right than in the ep "17 People".

posted 9 years ago by MyNameIsOliverQueen
17 replies | jump to latest

He may of come off as not caring for the President's immediate health but he was absolutely right about the Order of Succession and Leo having more power and authority than he should have. Upon reflection of the episodes "In the Shadow of Two Gunmen", it was evident that despite Hoynes's time in Congress and in the Senate and even the Vice-Presidency he was not ready to be President. He may have had the qualifications but he did have the backbone. While the Order of Succession was as Toby put it "murky at best" during the episodes, Hoynes folded over like a piece of paper once Leo asserted himself in the Situation Room. And the fact that Hoynes completely deferred to Leo's decision without even pausing to question him showed that Hoynes would have been a weak President. If Santos would have been a fly on that wall, he would have crushed Hoynes in the election on leadership capability.

[–] joeishotterthantimberflake 9 years ago

The Vice President has no authority to do anything short of the 25th amendment, so Hoynes could not have just started giving orders. He deferred to Leo because he knew that the President was going to be okay and that him trying to seize power for a short time period would further damage an already fractured relationship with the President.

[–] jacket18 9 years ago

Toby was right, but that moment probably says little about Hoynes ability to fulfill the Presidency one way or the other. Hoynes as shown as a man with many faults, but at the end of the day, he wasn't going to put the country in jeopardy over ego or political opportunism. Keep in mind that while Hoynes was certainly getting regular security briefings, he and Bartlet were not close, and as such, he was likely out of the loop on the latest goings-on in the foreign relations, whereas he knew President Bartlet kept Leo very close and that he was a trusted ally. In that moment, shock and concern for the President almost certainly trumped all else, and he was smart enough to realize that deferring to Leo was the correct decision in that moment.

To Toby's point though, neither the Vice President NOR the Chief of Staff has any authority as long as the President is alive and there is no signed letter removing him from power. The Joint Chiefs really didn't have to listen to either of them, and had they disagreed, it could have been a bigger issue.

[–] joeishotterthantimberflake 9 years ago

His point was not about Hoynes nor the shooting, it's that the President and Leo knew that this situation was a greater possibility and were not prepared.

The situation mirrors the Reagan shooting and it's said that George H.W. Bush not trying to seize power is what completely changed Reagan's perception of his Vice President.

[–] beantownratt 9 years ago

Al Hague went on television after the attempt on Regan and stated,"I am in charge here" . There was a lot of confusion in the White House as this same exact scenario was ensuing. Hague knew the order of succession and was trying to reassure Americans and warn our enemies that someone was in charge. It backfired on Al Hague and certain members of the government actually thought it was the beginning of a coup. Mr Hague was far too smart and made a very grave mistake in declaring he was in charge. It ruined him politically and smeared his reputation.

[–] captainwebelozappbrannigan 9 years ago

Then my question is (as non-USA citizen): who or what was in command at that exact moment? What if the Joint Chiefs did make a fuss, des the cabinet or congress has some power? And what about confidential/covert situations?

[–] joeishotterthantimberflake 9 years ago

Technically still the President and by default, Leo, unless the 25th Amendment was invoked by the Cabinet.

That's why Toby was so mad, for about two hours, Leo pulled a bloodless coup and usurped the Constitution.

[–] ncohafmuta 9 years ago

yes. what SHOULD happen is the cabinet should immediately vote to invoke the 25th to make the vice president the president.
they really need to fix that though. it's a problem just waiting to happen.

-Tony

[–] SaliceMcD 8 years ago

"by default, Leo?" Certainly not legally. The CoS is appointed, not elected, and is not in the line of succession. If you meant that the staff - and even Hoynes - would look to Leo for guidance, in any case, then I agree 100%.

I absolutely hated Bartlet's venomous sarcasm in 17 People. Toby was right.

[–] Theshornwonder 8 years ago

The Joint Chiefs would be subordinate to the Secretary of Defense.

[–] information_police 9 years ago

I make it a point never to disagree with Toby when he's right.

[–] XFiles25 9 years ago

He went too far

Loved it when Bartlet shouted 'shut up' at him

Sheen is such a good actor

[–] noel66 9 years ago

Bartlett was never more right than in Season 7 Episode 5, "Here Today". Toby always did think he was morally superior to Bartlett.

[–] defcon79 8 years ago

And Toby was right.

[–] LMayberry-2 8 years ago

What would have been the stupidest thing to do would be having a signed letter laying around that would turn over the office of the President. That would just be wrong. If the POTUS is undergoing surgery or planned medical procedures, I can see writing a letter for that specific event, but having a letter sitting around is just a coup waiting to happen.

And I have a major issue with Leo telling Toby that his pre-SOTU collapse was MS and not the flu. The private scenes between Jed and Abbey confirm him having the flu. Having MS can make anything that raises the body temperature worse, but his problem was the flu. And Jed did make an amazing recovery.

All the world is a stage and most of us are desperately unrehearsed.

[–] joeishotterthantimberflake 8 years ago

Dick Cheney did exactly that. In what I assume was a very secure safe somewhere, he had a signed resignation letter. He did that because he was concerned about his heart troubles and was worried if he was incapacitated, there was no way to remove the Vice President from power short of impeachment

[–] Sonatine97 8 years ago

I am rewatching TWW again, for about the 10th time over the years. And while watching Season One's "Five Votes Down" a similar thought crossed my mind during a scene whereby Bartlet is out of face on prescribed drugs and is sitting with Toby and other senior staff trying to hold a cogent discussion, even though he was talking complete nonsense.

Admittedly the scene was light relief but then I considered the possible implications - Bartlet didn't seem to have all his faculties during that period, so how could he be considered of sound-mind had some important decision come his way? For example, a terrorist attack on Washington! What orders could he give that could be taken seriously given his temporary unstable disposition?

One wonders what would happen if a real president or prime minister ended up drunk one evening, and then was forced into a decision-making process over a particular crisis.

“When is old news gonna be old news?”
― Arnold Vinick (The West Wing)

[–] LMayberry-2 8 years ago

Do we know the drinking habits of our current candidates?

Honestly, the pain pills were more of a risk than the multiple sclerosis. Bartlett and Toby sharing a drink of Bourbon while telling Toby about the MS and also having to decide about changing airport security is troubling. Should the POTIS be given a breathalizer everyday to see if he is fit to make a decision? Maybe so.

I don't see MS being a problem for a President, but alcohol and drug use is.

All the world is a stage and most of us are desperately unrehearsed.