>>5540745 (lb)
Why the concern about Muller? Are you thinking Mueller's (once a Marine always a Marine) Report will in anyway target POTUS? Don't count on it. If Mueller followed his original mandate he'd have no choice but to indict all DS players involved in FISA abuse including [HRC] & [BO]. At this point in time it seems more likely to me that Mueller's Report, assuming it is ever released, might turn out to be our long awaited MOAB.
I'm not. "Once a Marine always a Marine" is just one of many crumbs from Q suggesting that Mueller may be a grey hat and working with POTUS/Q. For the purpose of brevity I chose to omit many proofs supporting the opinions that both Mueler and Rosenstein are working with POTUS/Q. For example, Q 2118.
If [RR] is dirty, Mueller must also be dirty.
if Mueller is dirty, [RR] must also be dirty.
Q
With logical (and expanded) thinking, Q's above argument rewritten with logically equivalence to:
If [RR] is clean, Mueller must also be clean.
if Mueller is clean, [RR] must also be clean.
If you want to believe both Mueller and [RR] are dirty, fine. But logical thinking should tell you that the possibility that both are clean is not real, it is compelling.
Yes, sorry, my mistake.
"But logical thinking should tell you that the possibility that both [Mueller and RR] are clean is not [only] real, it is compelling."
Thanks, Anon, for noticing.
It really amazes me that Q can tell us to "think logically" and then give us a classically structured logical argument such as…
Q Post 2118
If [RR] is dirty, Mueller must also be dirty.
if Mueller is dirty, [RR] must also be dirty.
Q
And then not one philosophyfag steps forward (excepting me that I'm aware) to perform a rewrite of that argument by the 'logical equivalence rules of replacement. In other words, Q's post 2118 above is logically equivalent to the following argument:
If [RR] is clean, Mueller must also be clean.
if Mueller is clean, [RR] must also be clean.
Why in the hell would Q give us a classically structured logical argument such as post 2118 and then not want us to "think logically"? It is easy to assume that everything Q says should be interpreted in a way that makes you "feel" good. But a lot of the time the truth is hidden and requires one to "expand their thinking" in a way that is uncomfortable. All I can say is get used to it. Things are about to happen quickly and while you don't have to accept my opinions you should hopefully be comfortable with the possibility that your opinions may be wrong and require you to expand your thinking to see the truth.
Communism = Totalitarianism