[Cletus.D.Yokel]

Dan:

Go back to the Q-drop about the relationship btwx [RR] and RM. Read it again and “decipher” it socratically.

Where in that drop are either one ^said^ to be “clean”?

Socratic criticism allows for the reader to “infer” but that inference is never allowed to be the final conclusion. Future proves the past. One must always return to the bare words to validate any conclusion. When the smoke clears we can validate, not before. Until then...

“Dirty” means dirty.

NO DEALS

[defconw]

Q also said if RR is dirty them RM is dirty, If RR is clean then RM is clean. I still don't know. NOR does it matter. What matters is outcome. Lynch cooperated. etc.

I think trying to beat someone over the head to agree to certain interpretations is useless. Q said sheep no more. You make think what you want but so can the rest of us. Right? :)