# An old "West Wing" episode **URL:** \ **Category:** Cafe Society\ **Created:** [May 13, 2009, 6:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/an-old-west-wing-episode/496324 "2009-05-13T18:46:43Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![Keeve](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/f07891/32.png) [@Keeve](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Keeve)\ **Post date:** [May 13, 2009, 6:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/an-old-west-wing-episode/496324/1 "2009-05-13T18:46:43Z")
There’s a scene in a second-season West Wing episode ([Bad Moon Rising](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bad_Moon_Rising_(The_West_Wing))) that I’m not sure if I understand it correctly. The dialog (from [this site](http://www.westwingtranscripts.com/search.php?flag=getTranscript&id=41)) appears below. “Bartlet” refers to President Bartlet, and “Charlie” is one of his closest aides. A scandal is about to break, and the President is preparing Charlie for what is going to happen. > [@](#): > > BARTLET: We won’t discuss this any more for the time being. It’ll be public soon enough. And the more conversations you have with me, the more lawyers you’re gonna have to talk to, and they bill in an hour what you take home in a week, so we won’t discuss it except to say this: You’re gonna be subpoenaed. I’m confident in your loyalty to me. I’m confident in your love for me. If you lie to protect me, if you lie just once, if you lie just a little, if you lie 'cause you can’t stand what’s happening to me and the people making it happen, if you ever, ever lie… …you’re finished with me, you understand? > > CHARLIE: Yes, sir. > > BARTLET: Say you understand. > > CHARLIE: I understand, sir. > > BARTLET: Go back to work. This will probably be very obvious to most people, but I have a **lot** of trouble “reading between the lines”, and I’m not really sure what Bartlet is saying to Charlie. I strongly suspect that Bartlet is telling Charlie, “Please lie for me. But I can’t say that directly, because the lawyers will find out that I told you to lie, and everything will get even worse. So I can’t tell you to lie, but please lie anyway.” Or maybe Bartlet really means what he is saying. “I started this mess, and I don’t want you to get in any trouble by lying about it, so please tell the truth. I know you are loyal and want to protect me, but you better not, or else.” Both explanations fit the words. What do you think he really meant? ---
**Author:** ![The\_Devil\_s\_Grandmother](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/74df32/32.png) [@The\_Devil\_s\_Grandmother](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Devil_s_Grandmother)\ **Post date:** [May 13, 2009, 6:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/an-old-west-wing-episode/496324/2 "2009-05-13T18:53:51Z")
> [@Keeve](#): > > Or maybe Bartlet really means what he is saying. “I started this mess, and I don’t want you to get in any trouble by lying about it, so please tell the truth. I know you are loyal and want to protect me, but you better not, or else.” I think he meant this one. I think it would be inconsistent for Bartlett’s character to ask Charlie to lie for him, and possibly face jail time for doing so. ---
**Author:** ![iamthewalrus\_3](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/258eb7/32.png) [@iamthewalrus\_3](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iamthewalrus_3)\ **Post date:** [May 13, 2009, 6:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/an-old-west-wing-episode/496324/3 "2009-05-13T18:56:49Z")
I’ve read it a few times, and I don’t see how you could interpret it as the first. If Bartlett had only said the first part about confidence and loyalty, then sure, but with the last sentence, it’s pretty clear that he’s pointedly asking Charlie to be fully honest. ---
**Author:** ![Keeve](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/f07891/32.png) [@Keeve](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Keeve)\ **Post date:** [May 13, 2009, 6:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/an-old-west-wing-episode/496324/4 "2009-05-13T18:56:55Z")
Thanks. That’s what I hoped he meant. But the way he kept using so many words — he said “lie” five times! — made me wonder if there was a subtext. ---
**Author:** ![delphica](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e9a140/32.png) [@delphica](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/delphica)\ **Post date:** [May 13, 2009, 6:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/an-old-west-wing-episode/496324/5 "2009-05-13T18:57:47Z")
I think based on the characters, I have no doubt that Bartlett is speaking literally. Bartlett is always genuine in looking out for Charlie’s best interests, plus even beyond Charlie, Bartlett takes the whole concept of not lying while under oath pretty seriously. ---
**Author:** ![Munch](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/munch/32/5281_2.png) [@Munch](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Munch)\ **Post date:** [May 13, 2009, 7:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/an-old-west-wing-episode/496324/6 "2009-05-13T19:02:22Z")
> [@Keeve](#): > > I strongly suspect that Bartlet is telling Charlie, “Please lie for me. But I can’t say that directly, because the lawyers will find out that I told you to lie, and everything will get even worse. So I can’t tell you to lie, but please lie anyway.” He’s saying the exact opposite. He’s saying, “Don’t lie, I can take care of myself. I don’t doubt your loyalty to me - don’t try to prove it by doing something as stupid as lying, because I can weather this storm.” Edit: Where did all those responses come from! ---
**Author:** ![Keeve](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/f07891/32.png) [@Keeve](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Keeve)\ **Post date:** [May 13, 2009, 7:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/an-old-west-wing-episode/496324/7 "2009-05-13T19:17:46Z")
Thank you all. I am greatly releived. This has been bugging me for several years. ---
**Author:** ![Typo\_Negative](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/typo_negative/32/484_2.png) [@Typo\_Negative](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Typo_Negative)\ **Post date:** [May 13, 2009, 7:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/an-old-west-wing-episode/496324/8 "2009-05-13T19:19:38Z")
There is one thing that bothered me. It was after the errorist abduction\VP resignation fiasco. The settled on Bingo Bob as a VP because that’s all they thought they could get by the Republican Congress. But in Season 3, when they were talking about possible replacements for Hoynes on the ticket, Admiral Fitzwallace’s name came up. Why didn’t they think they could get HIM passed Congress? Or Nancy McNally? God, I miss that show… ---
**Author:** ![Pashnish\_Ewing](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/8797f3/32.png) [@Pashnish\_Ewing](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Pashnish_Ewing)\ **Post date:** [May 13, 2009, 8:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/an-old-west-wing-episode/496324/9 "2009-05-13T20:06:17Z")
Well, the sticking point with the replacement VP was it couldn’t be someone the Republicans were worried about taking on in the next general election. Fitz was older, but (I imagine) very popular with the public. Also remember, this was pre-Obama (even pre-Santos) America. The idea of a black (or female) VP may not have even been given serious consideration. ---
**Author:** ![Skald\_the\_Rhymer](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/ecccb3/32.png) [@Skald\_the\_Rhymer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Skald_the_Rhymer)\ **Post date:** [May 13, 2009, 8:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/an-old-west-wing-episode/496324/10 "2009-05-13T20:15:06Z")
You don’t have to read between the lines, because there is no irony in that scene. Bartlet is a good man, and means exactly what he says. Bartlet lives Charlie like a son, and wants him to marry his daughter (though, when you think of it, those two don’t quite go together except among the Vanir 🆒), and he knows Charlie both loves him and his loyal to him. Charlie has information which, in the show’s universe, can cause Bartlet a great deal of trouble; Bartlet’s already under investigation. He knows that Charlie’s impulse is going to be to protect him, perhaps by perjuring himself, and in the process, possibly ruin his life. Thus he is using their closeness as a weapon to force Charlie to go against his own impulses. Yeah, I know it sounds unlikely. But The West Wing (at least when Sorkin’s writing it) is deliberately unrealistic. It’s a fairy tale. “What if Bill Clinton wasn’t an selfish, unfaithful asshole? What if George Bush was competent? What if we had a president who was a good man?” ---
**Author:** ![Skald\_the\_Rhymer](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/ecccb3/32.png) [@Skald\_the\_Rhymer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Skald_the_Rhymer)\ **Post date:** [May 13, 2009, 8:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/an-old-west-wing-episode/496324/11 "2009-05-13T20:18:43Z")
re: Fitz Out of story, John Amos was doing another series at the time and wasn’t available. In-story: I think Fitzwallace had retired from his post by the time Bartlet needed a veep, and may well have intended to leave public life entirely. Yeah, I know he went to Israel to help negotiate soemthing or other (and died there), but that’s not the same as resuming work full-time. Moreover, he may well hae not wished political office. Not everybody in public service does. ---
**Author:** ![foolsguinea](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/foolsguinea/32/14751_2.png) [@foolsguinea](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/foolsguinea)\ **Post date:** [May 13, 2009, 8:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/an-old-west-wing-episode/496324/12 "2009-05-13T20:18:47Z")
I read it as the literal meaning. I think Bartlet is trying to protect Charlie. He doesn’t want others to pay the price for what Jed knows is **his** failing. But I sometimes miss subtle things. ---
**Author:** ![Kent\_Clark](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/kent_clark/32/105_2.png) [@Kent\_Clark](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kent_Clark)\ **Post date:** [May 13, 2009, 8:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/an-old-west-wing-episode/496324/13 "2009-05-13T20:52:31Z")
> [@spooje](#): > > There is one thing that bothered me. It was after the errorist abduction\VP resignation fiasco. > > The settled on Bingo Bob as a VP because that’s all they thought they could get by the Republican Congress. > > But in Season 3, when they were talking about possible replacements for Hoynes on the ticket, Admiral Fitzwallace’s name came up. Why didn’t they think they could get HIM passed Congress? Or Nancy McNally? Didn’t the Republican congressional leadership basically hand Bartlett a list of people they wouldn’t make trouble over? Bingo Bob was on the list and Bartlett decided he was the least bad alternative. ---
**Author:** ![The\_Devil\_s\_Grandmother](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/74df32/32.png) [@The\_Devil\_s\_Grandmother](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Devil_s_Grandmother)\ **Post date:** [May 13, 2009, 8:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/an-old-west-wing-episode/496324/14 "2009-05-13T20:55:23Z")
> [@Skald\_the\_Rhymer](#): > > …But The West Wing (at least when Sorkin’s writing it) is deliberately unrealistic. It’s a fairy tale. … What if we had a president who was a good man?" What is we had a president who was not only a good man, but far-seeing intellectual with an ego bigger than the sun? I love Bartlett’s geekiness, and his willingness to crush people who have week arguments. ---
**Author:** ![Skald\_the\_Rhymer](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/ecccb3/32.png) [@Skald\_the\_Rhymer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Skald_the_Rhymer)\ **Post date:** [May 13, 2009, 9:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/an-old-west-wing-episode/496324/15 "2009-05-13T21:04:08Z")
> [@The\_Devil\_s\_Grandmother](#): > > What is we had a president who was not only a good man, but far-seeing intellectual with an ego bigger than the sun? > I love Bartlett’s geekiness, and his willingness to crush people who have week arguments. I can’t decide whether Jed would point out your typo or criticize anyone for being so gauche as to do so. I’ll need at least 7 days to decide. ---
**Author:** ![Keeve](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/f07891/32.png) [@Keeve](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Keeve)\ **Post date:** [May 13, 2009, 9:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/an-old-west-wing-episode/496324/16 "2009-05-13T21:04:33Z")
> [@Skald\_the\_Rhymer](#): > > But The West Wing (at least when Sorkin’s writing it) is deliberately unrealistic. It’s a fairy tale. “What if Bill Clinton wasn’t an selfish, unfaithful asshole? What if George Bush was competent? What if we had a president who was a good man?” Ditto. That’s what keeps me watching. I so want to wish that at least some of our real-life officials are like that. ---
**Author:** ![Snooooopy](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/ee7513/32.png) [@Snooooopy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Snooooopy)\ **Post date:** [May 13, 2009, 9:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/an-old-west-wing-episode/496324/17 "2009-05-13T21:19:56Z")
> [@The\_Devil\_s\_Grandmother](#): > > I think he meant this one. I think it would be inconsistent for Bartlett’s character to ask Charlie to lie for him, and possibly face jail time for doing so. I think it would also be inconsistent as far as Aaron Sorkin’s writing style. If Sorkin builds up a big head of speechifying steam about the importance of telling the truth, that’s almost certainly the destination he wants to drive you to. ---
**Author:** ![FallenAngel](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/5daacb/32.png) [@FallenAngel](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FallenAngel)\ **Post date:** [May 13, 2009, 10:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/an-old-west-wing-episode/496324/18 "2009-05-13T22:38:32Z")
> [@Skald\_the\_Rhymer](#): > > Yeah, I know it sounds unlikely. But The West Wing (at least when Sorkin’s writing it) is deliberately unrealistic. It’s a fairy tale. “What if Bill Clinton wasn’t an selfish, unfaithful asshole? What if George Bush was competent? What if we had a president who was a good man?” Leo: Because I am tired of it. Year, after year, after year. Of having to choose between the lesser of Who Cares. Of trying to get myself excited over a candidate who can speak in complete sentences. Of setting the bar so low I can hardly look at it. They say a good man can’t get elected president. I don’t believe that. Do you? Bartlet: And you think I’m that man? Leo: Yes. Bartlet: Doesn’t it matter that I’m not as sure? Leo: Nah. ‘Act as if ye have faith and faith shall be given to you.’ Put another way: ‘Fake it until you make it.’ I’d settle for one day having a person in the White House is isn’t a lunatic or a lying huckster. There’s been one in my lifetime. I’m not optimistic. ---
**Author:** ![glee](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/b5a626/32.png) [@glee](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/glee)\ **Post date:** [May 13, 2009, 11:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/an-old-west-wing-episode/496324/19 "2009-05-13T23:34:22Z")
Bartlett is a good man who makes a bad decision (to keep his illness concealed). He admires Charlie, because he is bringing up his sibling after his mother (a cop) got shot. Bartlett knows that lying to the investigation is a crime and that Charlie is incredibly loyal (there’s a scene where a gun is fired at the White House and Charlie smashes his way past the Secret Service to help the President.) So Bartlett is determined that this young man will not throw his life away out of a sense of misguided loyalty. And the only way he can be sure of this is to threaten Charlie with dismissal from ever seeing the President again (if Charlie lies). ---
**Author:** ![Priam](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/77aa72/32.png) [@Priam](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Priam)\ **Post date:** [May 13, 2009, 11:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/an-old-west-wing-episode/496324/20 "2009-05-13T23:36:34Z")
> [@Keeve](#): > > This will probably be very obvious to most people, but I have a **lot** of trouble “reading between the lines”, and I’m not really sure what Bartlet is saying to Charlie. > > I strongly suspect that Bartlet is telling Charlie, “Please lie for me. But I can’t say that directly, because the lawyers will find out that I told you to lie, and everything will get even worse. So I can’t tell you to lie, but please lie anyway.” > > Or maybe Bartlet really means what he is saying. “I started this mess, and I don’t want you to get in any trouble by lying about it, so please tell the truth. I know you are loyal and want to protect me, but you better not, or else.” > > Both explanations fit the words. What do you think he really meant? There’s also the factor of Congress likely finding out about a lie, thus compounding the world of trouble that the Bartlett administration would find itself in. It throws out the window whatever good cred they had built over fully cooperating with the special prosecutor. [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/an-old-west-wing-episode/496324.md?page=2)