Kavanaugh called himself & his friends 'loud, obnoxious drunks' in 1983 letter and signed it 'Bart'

[Duckalert]

So what part of drinking did Kavanaugh lie about?

The amount of it.

He gave the impression he drank now and then but it is beginning to look like he had a problem and that his behavour was less than dignified during those times.

 

[SweetSue92]

Didn't Kavanaugh's friend Mark Judge makes references to a character by the name of 'Bart O'Kavanaugh' in his book "Wasted"?

If a person admits that they were a 'loud obnoxous drunk" at some point in time but when questioned directly about his drinking during his confirmation hearing denies this aspect of his life, this doesn't raise questions in the minds of most?

I mean I realize that it's not flattering to portray onself as a any form of a drunk but obnoxious drunks do behave inappropriately, including grabbing on women, not being able to read the subtle and not so subtle indications that their attentions are unwanted.

New York Times: Kavanaugh called himself and his friends 'loud, obnoxious drunks' in 1983 letter -- and signed it 'Bart' - CNNPolitics

New York Times: Kavanaugh called himself and his friends 'loud, obnoxious drunks' in 1983 letter -- and signed it 'Bart'
By Sophie Tatum, CNN

Updated 9:29 AM ET, Wed October 3, 2018

Current Time 1:48
/
Duration Time 1:48

Source: CNN

Kavanaugh 1983 letter: We're obnoxious drunks 01:48

Washington (CNN) In a letter written in 1983, Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh describes himself and his friends as "loud, obnoxious drunks with prolific pukers" -- a stark contrast to the image Kavanaugh painted of himself during his testimony before the Senate last week.

The letter, which was published by The New York Times, and which The Times reports was written by Kavanaugh, shows him reviewing details for an upcoming trip with seven fellow Georgetown Preparatory School classmates. It offers another glimpse into the social lives of the students who attended private schools outside of Washington during the 1980s -- a scene that has been central to questions about Kavanaugh and the accusations of sexual assault he faces.

Also of note, Kavanaugh signs the letter "Bart" -- a name which has previously come up as a possible reference to Kavanaugh in his former classmate Mark Judge's book, where he writes about "Bart O'Kavanaugh."

Kavanaugh was asked about the reference to "Bart" in Judge's book during his questioning by the Senate Judiciary Committee last week.

Sen. Patrick Leahy, a Democrat from Vermont, and Kavanaugh went back and forth about the reference, but Kavanaugh appeared to avoid directly answering the question.

"Judge Kavanaugh, I'm trying to get a straight answer from you under oath," Leahy said. He then proceeded to ask Kavanaugh if he was Bart, "yes or no?"

Kavanaugh responded: "You'd have to ask him" -- meaning Judge.​

I wonder if you know the damage this is doing to the Democrats.

It would appear you do not. Oh well, that's not my problem, and I certainly do not lament it. I have seen myself what the Democrats are in living color last Thursday--not that I didn't already know. Nauseating. Many people are turning away, and many other people formerly apathetic about voting in the midterms are planning on voting now.

 

[ptbw forever]

Who gives a damn. There is still, zero evidence that he did shit to the woman whose old boyfriend is now claiming she is lying on top of having no evidence and four witnesses debunking her story.

Nobody has "debunked her story". That's still true as it was last week and no amount of posting fantasies changes it.

But that's effectively water under the bridge at this point after Kavanaugh's hideous display of injudicious temperament, coupled with evasion and lying under oath including the one you just plopped in the post above.

It is truly scary how people as stupid as you are exist in this world.

 

[SmokeALib]

A college student that drinks beer? Get the hell outta here.

 

[NewsVine_Mariyam]

I wonder if you know the damage this is doing to the Democrats.

It would appear you do not. Oh well, that's not my problem, and I certainly do not lament it. I have seen myself what the Democrats are in living color last Thursday--not that I didn't already know. Nauseating. Many people are turning away, and many other people formerly apathetic about voting in the midterms are planning on voting now.

It is truly disturbing the way you all paint all democrats (or any other group) with the same broad brush.

I am not a democrat so no, it has not crossed my mind that they are allegedly causing "damage". I am aware of the fact though that only petty and vindictive individuals would try to harm others because they do not agree with them exercising any of their lawful rights.

 

[SweetSue92]

I wonder if you know the damage this is doing to the Democrats.

It would appear you do not. Oh well, that's not my problem, and I certainly do not lament it. I have seen myself what the Democrats are in living color last Thursday--not that I didn't already know. Nauseating. Many people are turning away, and many other people formerly apathetic about voting in the midterms are planning on voting now.

It is truly disturbing the way you all paint all democrats (or any other group) with the same broad brush.

I am not a democrat so no, it has not crossed my mind that they are allegedly causing "damage". I am aware of the fact though that only petty and vindictive individuals would try to harm others because they do not agree with them exercising any of their lawful rights.

Being a Democrat is a choice. It is not immutable. You can leave it or enter it at any time, freely so. So absolutely, I can paint with broad brushes and have no problem doing it. I saw the leaders of the Democrats in the Senate engage in the most disgusting, de-humanizing, debasing tactics I have ever imagined I would see coming out of DC--and believe me, that's saying something.

Anyone freely CHOOSING to still affiliate with that party---well, have at it. I will freely judge. And I can, because as I said, not immutable.

You might not be a Democrat but you affiliate with the ACLU and apparently don't believe in basic American values like due process and "innocent until proven guilty".

Tragically, this does not shock me in the least. The Left is only about one thing these days: obtaining its own power.

 

[NewsVine_Mariyam]

Being a Democrat is a choice. It is not immutable. You can leave it or enter it at any time, freely so. So absolutely, I can paint with broad brushes and have no problem doing it. I saw the leaders of the Democrats in the Senate engage in the most disgusting, de-humanizing, debasing tactics I have ever imagined I would see coming out of DC--and believe me, that's saying something.

Anyone freely CHOOSING to still affiliate with that party---well, have at it. I will freely judge. And I can, because as I said, not immutable.

You might not be a Democrat but you affiliate with the ACLU and apparently don't believe in basic American values like due process and "innocent until proven guilty".

Tragically, this does not shock me in the least. The Left is only about one thing these days: obtaining its own power.

So when you couldn't get any traction by attempting to attack me as a Democrat you decided to switch ove to the ACLU? I don't affiliate with the ACLU, I am a card-carrying member but what your statement discloses is that for some reason you have a problem with me. And I don't believe you thinking you're judging me has anything to do with either the ACLU or the Democratic party so what is it? I noticed for a while that you were dogging all of my threads with antagonistic comments then you dropped off for a while but now you're back on duty?

 

[SweetSue92]

Being a Democrat is a choice. It is not immutable. You can leave it or enter it at any time, freely so. So absolutely, I can paint with broad brushes and have no problem doing it. I saw the leaders of the Democrats in the Senate engage in the most disgusting, de-humanizing, debasing tactics I have ever imagined I would see coming out of DC--and believe me, that's saying something.

Anyone freely CHOOSING to still affiliate with that party---well, have at it. I will freely judge. And I can, because as I said, not immutable.

You might not be a Democrat but you affiliate with the ACLU and apparently don't believe in basic American values like due process and "innocent until proven guilty".

Tragically, this does not shock me in the least. The Left is only about one thing these days: obtaining its own power.

So when you couldn't get any traction by attempting to attack me as a Democrat you decided to switch ove to the ACLU? I don't affiliate with the ACLU, I am a card-carrying member but what your statement discloses is that for some reason you have a problem with me. And I don't believe you thinking you're judging me has anything to do with either the ACLU or the Democratic party so what is it? I noticed for a while that you were dogging all of my threads with antagonistic comments then you dropped off for a while but now you're back on duty?

You have an ACLU avatar did you not? I thought you were affiliated strongly. So if you're just a member, that's my mistake. It is too bad what happened to the ACLU however; they used to stand for civil liberties and no longer do.

I have no problems with you personally, actually. I think you're probably a lovely woman to be honest. I hate to see lovely people enmeshed in the Left, because it's corrosive. At one time I was a feminist liberal pro-choice Democrat who voted for Jesse Jackson in the 1988 primary. Truth. Ten years later, I saw the machinations. I had my #WalkAway moment 20 years before the movement started, I guess you would say. I'd like to see other people walk away--especially good people, smart people. If it seems like I'm dogging you, that's probably why.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

He never denied drinking. He denied having memory lapses due to blackouts. He was actually quite adamant about liking beer. Try being honest for once.

Why do you think blacking out is the only indicator that someone is drinking way too much? People who drink & drive aren't blacked out, but they apparently can't remember that they are not supposed to be drinking when they're intoxicated because doing so is not only illegal but dangerous since they could injure or kill someone.

So when do you graduate from high school? Your level of understanding this issue is better than most libtards, but still sophomoric.

People who drink and drive don't "not remember". That is just stupid! They make a decision to do so. That is why we hold them responsible for their actions.

 

[kyzr]

If Kavanaugh was an alcoholic there is no way he'd have been 1st in his class at Yale or 1st in his Law School, they do have a few smart kids at Yale. Why does the Left look at drinking instead of academics? College kids drink. Being 1st in your class is an accomplishment.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

So what part of drinking did Kavanaugh lie about?

The amount of it.

He gave the impression he drank now and then but it is beginning to look like he had a problem and that his behavour was less than dignified during those times.

That is not a lie if that is what he believes. Why does his high school drinking matter over three decades later anyway? It is simply desparation by libtards.

 

[Mac1958]

So Kavanaugh was hardcore party boy in college. And an athlete. Anyone who went to college, who partied at all, who claims they didn't come across a few dozen people like that are completely full of shit.

Stipulated, fer fuck's sake.

The question then is, has he lied under oath. That's it. That would be disqualifying.
.

 

[iceberg]

Didn't Kavanaugh's friend Mark Judge makes references to a character by the name of 'Bart O'Kavanaugh' in his book "Wasted"?

If a person admits that they were a 'loud obnoxous drunk" at some point in time but when questioned directly about his drinking during his confirmation hearing denies this aspect of his life, this doesn't raise questions in the minds of most?

I mean I realize that it's not flattering to portray onself as a any form of a drunk but obnoxious drunks do behave inappropriately, including grabbing on women, not being able to read the subtle and not so subtle indications that their attentions are unwanted.

New York Times: Kavanaugh called himself and his friends 'loud, obnoxious drunks' in 1983 letter -- and signed it 'Bart' - CNNPolitics

New York Times: Kavanaugh called himself and his friends 'loud, obnoxious drunks' in 1983 letter -- and signed it 'Bart'
By Sophie Tatum, CNN

Updated 9:29 AM ET, Wed October 3, 2018

Current Time 1:48
/
Duration Time 1:48

Source: CNN

Kavanaugh 1983 letter: We're obnoxious drunks 01:48

Washington (CNN) In a letter written in 1983, Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh describes himself and his friends as "loud, obnoxious drunks with prolific pukers" -- a stark contrast to the image Kavanaugh painted of himself during his testimony before the Senate last week.

The letter, which was published by The New York Times, and which The Times reports was written by Kavanaugh, shows him reviewing details for an upcoming trip with seven fellow Georgetown Preparatory School classmates. It offers another glimpse into the social lives of the students who attended private schools outside of Washington during the 1980s -- a scene that has been central to questions about Kavanaugh and the accusations of sexual assault he faces.

Also of note, Kavanaugh signs the letter "Bart" -- a name which has previously come up as a possible reference to Kavanaugh in his former classmate Mark Judge's book, where he writes about "Bart O'Kavanaugh."

Kavanaugh was asked about the reference to "Bart" in Judge's book during his questioning by the Senate Judiciary Committee last week.

Sen. Patrick Leahy, a Democrat from Vermont, and Kavanaugh went back and forth about the reference, but Kavanaugh appeared to avoid directly answering the question.

"Judge Kavanaugh, I'm trying to get a straight answer from you under oath," Leahy said. He then proceeded to ask Kavanaugh if he was Bart, "yes or no?"

Kavanaugh responded: "You'd have to ask him" -- meaning Judge.​

and? i was a pretty obnoxiou drunk in college also at times. i'd bet most of the people holding kavanaugh to a stupid standard were also. that's what college was for. however it says nothing of sexual predator behavior and that has not been found in 7 searches, 1 specifically for it. so stop looking for a sidetrack to go down now that your main road has self destructed.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

So Kavanaugh was hardcore party boy in college. And an athlete. Anyone who went to college, who partied at all, who claims they didn't come across a few dozen people like that are completely full of shit.

Stipulated, fer fuck's sake.

The question then is, has he lied under oath. That's it. That would be disqualifying.
.

Lying under oath is OK since Bill Clinton did it.

 

[iceberg]

So what part of drinking did Kavanaugh lie about?

The amount of it.

He gave the impression he drank now and then but it is beginning to look like he had a problem and that his behavour was less than dignified during those times.

don't
give
a
fuck​

 

[Mac1958]

The question then is, has he lied under oath. That's it. That would be disqualifying.

Lying under oath is OK since Bill Clinton did it.

Our wings sure find joy in lowering standards to match each other.
.

 

[JWBooth]

New York Times: Kavanaugh called himself and his friends 'loud, obnoxious drunks' in 1983 letter -- and signed it 'Bart' - CNNPolitics

New York Times: Kavanaugh called himself and his friends 'loud, obnoxious drunks' in 1983 letter -- and signed it 'Bart'
By Sophie Tatum, CNN

​

Your people had every opportunity to take the guy out on the merits, his disregard fo 4th amendment protections for example, but chose to focus on unprovable high school nonsense. This guy making it to the SC is on you people. The blind hatred for the annoying orange prohibits rational thinking, but it is fundraising gold.

 

[Correll]

Leave your contact information, the creepy porn lawyer would like to speak with you.

So fragile the male ego in some. You all can not keep from making this personal can you?

When you strongly imply that loud obnoxious drunks are all woman assaulters, you made it personal.

 

[iceberg]

The question then is, has he lied under oath. That's it. That would be disqualifying.

Lying under oath is OK since Bill Clinton did it.

Our wings sure find joy in lowering standards to match each other.
.

except i don't think he lied. he said quite a few times he loves beer. so much so you'd lose count trying to keep up. as a friend just said, the left is now "picking fly shit out of pepper"

first it's he's a rapist
then it's he's a liar despite saying he drank in college (nevermind ford lied, they don't give a shit there)
then he dared to throw ice at someone (please show me THAT evidence)
and now - this.

sometimes you gotta step back and see the carnage we've become. it sucks.

 

[Claudette]

Most guys drinking were loud and obnoxious.

Nothing new there.