The West Wing

Pilot - S1-E1

Factual error: The Lockheed 1011 was only produced until 1984. There's no way that in 1999 Toby would be flying on one that "just came off the line 20 months ago."

Tomorrow - S7-E22

Factual error: Early in the episode, when Abby complains about who in their right mind would schedule outdoor inaugurations in January, Jed retorts by listing Jefferson, Adams, and Franklin, but inaugurations were in March until 1936 - not a mistake President Bartlet would make.

marathon69

Mandatory Minimums - S1-E20

Factual error: When Leo is reminding the Congressional Aides about their bosses' drug scandals, he states that Vicodin is a Schedule II Controlled Substance. At the time the episode was shot, Vicodin was a Schedule III Controlled Substance. Given his experience in this area he'd know better.

In the Shadow of Two Gunmen: Part I - S2-E1

Factual error: In the scene where the Secret Service chief is in the car with Bartlet and he suddenly realizes Bartlet's injured, he yells to the driver to get to GW Hospital and the limo does a screeching U-turn on what appears to be the Arlington Memorial Bridge. At the time they were supposed to be heading from Rosslyn, VA, where the event was, back to the White House. But GW is in DC, not that far from the White House, so although the U-turn looks cool, it doesn't make geographical sense. Also, in that one shot of the outside of the car, it appears to be pouring, while back at the scene of the shooting as well as ahead of them at the hospital entrance, it's not.

Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.

Suggested correction: At the point where we see the Lincoln memorial, we're given the first hint that it is the Arlington Memorial (and not the Roosevelt). But they're almost off the bridge at that point and it's a full 1 minute and 6 seconds later that he yells for GW. The turnaround wasn't on the bridge. Given that amount of time, they could have been most of the way down Constitution Ave NW. (or any other side street) heading away from GW and heading to the White House. A turnaround would make sense.

In the Shadow of Two Gunmen: Part II - S2-E2

Factual error: Sam says the "state-of-the-art" oil tanker he recommends can carry 2.2 million gallons of oil and weighs 308,000 tons. The Exxon Valdez could carry over 60 million gallons (1.48 million barrels) and weighed only 211,500 tons. The writers mistakenly swapped 'gallons' for 'barrels' so that this enormous tanker carries very little oil. It would actually carry 2.2 million "barrels", which equals 92 million gallons.

johnrosa

Angel Maintenance - S4-E19

Factual error: At the end of the episode, the pilot says their runway has been changed to "runway 39." Runway headings are multiples of 10° from 01 up to 36. There cannot be a "runway 39."

Tomorrow - S7-E22

Factual error: When the president signs Toby's Presidential Pardon you can see his name listed as "Toby." However such a document would refer to someone by their full, legal name. In this case the document should say "Tobias" not Toby, which, although commonly used throughout the series, is still only a nickname.

The Portland Trip - S2-E7

Factual error: In the situation room, Colonel Chase informs Leo that a CH-47 Seahawk helicopter was dispatched from the USS Monterey. Problem is, the CH-47 is called "Chinook" while the SH-60 is the Seahawk (of which the USS Monterey carries two). See: http://picasaweb.google.com/agbeko.Dzamesi/Aircraft/photo5029495094968996146 for photo of an SH-60B Seahawk landing on the USS Monterey. (00:11:20)

johnrosa

Inauguration: Part I - S4-E14

Factual error: In this episode, it is Inauguration Day in January. In the previous episode, when CJ is visiting her father in Dayton, Ohio, it is February, according to CJ (when she complains that it will be too cold to go fishing with her father).

TopRamen17

Galileo - S2-E9

Factual error: In the scene when Leo tells president Bartlett that he is attending the concert, they refer to the Icelandic ambassador as a man. Leo says his name is Vigdis Olafsdottir, when is fact it is a woman's name that means Vigdis daughter of Olaf. During the concert the ambassador is portrayed by a man. They "borrowed" this name from Tom Clancy's novel Red Storm Rising, by the way.

mace767

18th and Potomac - S2-E21

Factual error: When the NSA, Dr. McNally, lists the Haitian order of battle, she indicates that their troops have 2 Bradleys with 120mm cannon. The Bradley is equipped with is a 25mm chain gun.

20 Hours in America: Part I - S4-E1

Factual error: This show is supposed to take place in September, but the height of the corn and the complete lack of foliage change (even in early September there would be a little red or orange in the trees) make it look much more like June.

Isaac and Ishmael - S3-E1

Factual error: A secret service agent goes to Leo McGarry and tells him Sharif has crossed the border from Canada into the US - he says "from Ontario into Vermont". It is about 50 miles from Ontario to the Vermont border - the only province that borders on Vermont is Quebec. At this high level of intelligence, this could not be a character error - just the West Wing writers not checking a map.

Angel Maintenance - S4-E19

Factual error: The fighter jet alongside Air Force One has "NY" tail markings which designate it's with the 174th fighter wing, with a home base of Syracuse, New York. Surely, in this emergency over Washington, DC, jets from a more local base (like the 113th's F-16s at Andrews AFB) would have been dispatched to aid the President's plane. (00:13:05)

johnrosa

Dead Irish Writers - S3-E16

Factual error: When the British Ambassador, Lord Marbury, greets Abbey at her party, he tenders best wishes from "Her Royal Majesty", his Monarch. However, as Her official representative, Lord John should have been cognizant that the reigning British monarch is referred to strictly as "His/Her Majesty".

Gone Quiet - S3-E7

Factual error: Hal Holbrook's character is called in to assist in solving an incident where a US sub has gone missing in hostile waters. Despite being elderly, he is considered an expert in such matters, and is advising the President in that capacity. Yet while relating similar historical submarine incidents, he makes two significant errors. First, he describes the "Glomar Explorer" and the K-129 Russian sub as "two subs", but the Glomar was a surface ship, not a sub (See http://www.espionageinfo.com/images/eeis_02_img0482.jpg). Then he states the USS Gudgeon was trapped by Russian ships for four days, but the entire incident took 30 hours. He is never challenged on these facts, and his advice is unquestioned. Rather than character mistakes, as the character's meant to be an expert, this is more likely bad research and embellishment by the writers. (00:28:00)

johnrosa

The Women of Qumar - S3-E9

Factual error: When Sam is telling Leo about the couple who crashed their car after the fundraiser where the President talked about seat belts, he states, "Now she's suing him for contributory negligence!" Contributory Negligence is not something you can sue for, it is a defense to a lawsuit and is based on the plaintiff's own negligent conduct - the woman would be suing the president for just "negligence." Sam repeats the phrase at 7:45, when he claims "Contributory negligence in wrongful death is the tort equivalent of murder." This makes no sense from a legal perspective. As an attorney, Sam would know the difference - this a writing mistake. (00:01:52)

tinsmith

Pilot - S1-E1

Factual error: The Lockheed 1011 was only produced until 1984. There's no way that in 1999 Toby would be flying on one that "just came off the line 20 months ago."

More mistakes in The West Wing
More quotes from The West Wing
More trivia for The West Wing

In Excelsis Deo - S1-E10

Question: This is as good a place to ask as any. In various US TV shows (including this one, and this episode), someone says "I could care less", when they always seem to mean "I couldn't care less", ie. they have no interest in what's going on. Surely if they COULD care less that means they actually care a reasonable amount? Is there any logic to this, or is it just a really annoying innate lack of sense?

Jon Sandys

Chosen answer: A really annoying innate lack of sense. My friends and family say the same thing all the time, and I'm endlessly trying to correct them. I think people just don't know any better and (ironically) couldn't care less that they're speaking incorrectly.

Answer: It's an endlessly annoying dropped negative, and it's been a common colloquialism for far too long. I believe it comes from an original (and now omitted and merely implied) "As if" preceding the statement. "As if I could care less." (Meaning "As if it were possible that I could care even less than I do.") But there's really no way to know.

More questions & answers from The West Wing

Join the mailing list

Separate from membership, this is to get updates about mistakes in recent releases. Addresses are not passed on to any third party, and are used solely for direct communication from this site. You can unsubscribe at any time.

Check out the mistake & trivia books, on Kindle and in paperback.