Enquirer settles with McDougal after Cohen raid

[_subgenius]

my opinion is irrelevant as is the determination of them having sex or not having sex.

The question was just to see if you would be honest, and as usual, you do not disappoint with your dishonesty.

nope, i honestly believe my opinion on the matter is irrelevant as is it honestly irrelevant as to whether or not it actually occurred. I am sorry that my answer was not the answer you wanted, but your presuppositions have never actually required an honest answer.

[_Themis]

nope, i honestly believe my opinion on the matter is irrelevant as is it honestly irrelevant as to whether or not it actually occurred. I am sorry that my answer was not the answer you wanted, but your presuppositions have never actually required an honest answer.

I'm sure you believe it is irrelevant, but not the issue. I just asked you a simple question about what you believed knowing you would avoid answering it as you usually do with almost all questions people ask you. Your troll behavior is just to attack others and try to waste their time with stupid CFR's and such. You know Trump did have sex with her but you will simply not criticize anyone you think is on your political team.

[_subgenius]

...knowing you would avoid answering it as you usually do with almost all questions people ask you.

Yet prior you said it was question to test "honesty"...so, exactly what was your motive? because apparently it was not because you sincerely wanted to know my answer, as you now admit. Yet given your nefarious question you have the arrogance to be insulted that, in kind, i responded nefariously? say wha?

Your troll behavior...

troll question deserves troll answer...and since you have admitted your question was a troll one, why you surprised? u mad?

is just to attack others...

nope, mine is almost always a counter-attack or the occasional exasperation at the idiocy in a particular post....or in this case, the usual and blatant hair-fire hyperbole by floppy sack Hawkeye.

and try to waste their time with stupid CFR's and such....

Yes, terribly distracting to request someone justify their assertions with facts or references....and predictably, seldom is the call hearkened....which is understandable when the assertion of truth is simply what a poster "knows in their heart" because it just "makes sense".

You know Trump did have sex with her...

if i knew or did not know would still result in my not caring because it is an irrelevant distraction to a mature adult's life in the context of executive government.

but you will simply not criticize anyone you think is on your political team.

sure i will, whenever it is relevant....and do not presume to know who i "think" is on my political team, or that i even have a political team.

[_Themis]

Yet prior you said it was question to test "honesty"...so, exactly what was your motive? because apparently it was not because you sincerely wanted to know my answer, as you now admit. Yet given your nefarious question you have the arrogance to be insulted that, in kind, i responded nefariously? say wha?

It was just to give you a chance to answer a simple question. If it's so irrelevant and unimportant why avoid it like the plague?

nope, mine is almost always a counter-attack or the occasional exasperation at the idiocy in a particular post....or in this case, the usual and blatant hair-fire hyperbole by floppy sack Hawkeye.

Unfortunately no. Most of what you say is usually quite stupid.

Yes, terribly distracting to request someone justify their assertions with facts or references....and predictably, seldom is the call hearkened....which is understandable when the assertion of truth is simply what a poster "knows in their heart" because it just "makes sense".

Most of your CFR's are not legitimate and only meant to see if you can waste people's time trolling them. Half the time you don't even know how to properly use them.

if i knew or did not know would still result in my not caring because it is an irrelevant distraction to a mature adult's life in the context of executive government.

I could agree with that if it was used consistently and not depending on which party one belongs to.

sure i will, whenever it is relevant....and do not presume to know who i "think" is on my political team, or that i even have a political team.

I haven't seen anything to support that in your posting history. You are quite consistent in being one-sided in favor of the far right.