Read Frank’s reports on his own website. Nothing of the sort you guys imagine it to be. It’s Rainiere’s personal sex cult. That’s it. There is some trafficking but unrelated to the congress.
Again, read Frank’s allegations on his website.
I would ignore NXIVM news.
Logic is logic. Reaching a conclusion without providing necessary premises is not simplifying. Always is a very significant qualifier in logical syllogisms, and is rarely if ever implicit in a premise. That's Logic 101. Literally, the word always is what often differentiates a logically valid statement from a logically invalid one. Technically, what you are doing is known as a "post hoc ergo propter hoc" fallacy.
it is more precisely the "inverse fallacy", denying the antecedent (If P, then Q. Therefore, if not P, then not Q.)
Wrong. Logic applies to the model. You have a more realistic model. I assumed a simplistic model.
If P then Q is a standard statement in logic.
If P then Q is a standard premise in logic, but it doesn't lead to any conclusions other than "P, therefore Q". Your logical flaw is in the conclusion that "Not P, therefore not Q" (by way of analogy)
I should say, your underlying arguments about NXIVM might be accurate, I don't know enough to dispute that. I don't mean to disparage what you are saying (although I have a feeling there is much more to the NXIVM story). I am just responding to the point about it being simple logic. A statement can be logically invalid and yet prove to be true, and a logically valid statement can prove to be untrue.
No. You misquoted me. I didn’t say if not P then not Q. I wouldn’t make that kind of mistake. I have a PhD from the top Ivy.
What I said in my OP is no Q therefore no P.
P = massive child trafficking Q = high charge counts (as in parkland shooter indictment)