[Cletus.D.Yokel]

Wait...2117? That number seems off (too contemporary). I’m at work and the QMAP sites get firewalled...I cannot grab the drop#.

++++
There is a Q-drop that says:
If [RR is dirty, then Mueller is dirty
If Mueller is dirty, then [RR] is dirty.
++++

This should be understood to indicate that neither [RR] OR Mulehead is “CLEAN”, as that implication is NOT FOUND in the drop...only dirty.

[RitaOK]

You are quite right to make the distinction between my use of a *title* found at qmap.pub, (2117) and your accurate quote, by Q, found at 8chan. Crap. I’ve messed up a lot, lately. Thanks, for your mild mannered correction. I appreciate it that you didn’t blow me up. 🤠

[generally]

I respectfully disagree. As a mathematician, I can tell you that in formal logic, these two sentences imply nothing unless you already know whether one of the conditions is true. (I hate to play the "expert" card and say trust me, but the short version is that until we know for sure about one of them, we know nothing about the other.) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First-order_logic (long explanation of logic) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Material_conditional#Truth_table (truth table) So in the table p q p → q T T T T F F F T T F F T p = RR is dirty q = Mueller is dirty p → q says if RR is dirty then Mueller is dirty. so in the table it shows us that Line 1. the statement is TRUE if both are dirty Line 2. the statement is FALSE if RR is dirty but Mueller is not Line 3. the statement is TRUE if RR is NOT dirty but Mueller is Line 4. the statement is TRUE if both are dirty q → p is the same with RR and Mueller swapped. So Q is telling us the truth if they are both dirty. He is also telling us the truth if they are both NOT dirty. ... or of course Q could be giving us disinformation and this all goes out the window. Bottom line: Both clean OR both dirty. Another discussion is whether the Q team is trained in formal logic. I believe that at least one member of the team is, and possibly is a mathematician or has at least studied logic. There is evidence of a strong cryptographic background on the team and that points to high level math skills.

[TXnMA]

It was, indeed, Qdrop #2117:

~~~~~~~~~~~~~

2117

If [RR] is dirty, Mueller must also be dirty.
if Mueller is dirty, [RR] must also be dirty.
Q
~~~~~~~~~~~~~

TXnMA
 

[Lady Heron]

No doubt Mueller is dirty but the real question is, was that used against him in his meeting with Trump the night before he was made special counsel?

What has Mueller accomplished other than be a massive distraction or in other words misdirection and tie up a bunch of top dem lawyers?...nothing of interest or even close to Trump/ Russia collusion.

How utterly stupid do you have to be not to try and save yourself by making deals with the incoming administration? Mueller has survived DC through both Democrat and Republican administrations....that is someone who knows how to play all sides and come out ahead.

I could be very wrong and Mueller has all the sudden put on the dunce cap and is willing to fall on his sword for corrupt Dems but I have a terrible time seeing it since he has never before been this partisan or stupid...dirty yes, stupid????