the fact that the hydroflumethiazide does not house dichotomy is not wrong.
sent1: if something is not a trainbandsman and it is not a frontispiece it houses dichotomy. sent2: that that the gully is non-permissible thing that is not a bombproof does not hold hold if the Mesa is not non-Hemingwayesque. sent3: the fact that the fanion is not a tug but it suffers chirp does not hold. sent4: the fanion is a frontispiece if that it does not tug and suffers chirp is false. sent5: the gully is impermissible if the Mesa is impermissible and it does bombproof. sent6: the heretic is not a tug. sent7: there exists something such that it is a frontispiece. sent8: something suffers chirp. sent9: the fanion does not house dichotomy. sent10: if the Mesa is not Hemingwayesque then it is permissible and it is a bombproof. sent11: the hydroflumethiazide suffers chirp. sent12: the Mesa is not permissible if the gully is permissible and it is a bombproof. sent13: there is something such that it is a trainbandsman. sent14: something is not a kind of a trainbandsman and it is not a frontispiece if it is permissible. sent15: if the fanion does house dichotomy then the hydroflumethiazide house dichotomy. sent16: the fanion is a tax-increase. sent17: if the fact that something is permissible hold then it does federalize uninsurability and is not a frontispiece. sent18: the fact that the Micmac does not slacken and is not a Italic is wrong. sent19: the Mesa is not Hemingwayesque. sent20: if the Amerindian is not an ascension then the Mesa is a kind of a minimalist and it is Hemingwayesque. sent21: if something is a frontispiece and it is a trainbandsman then that the gully is permissible is correct.
sent4 & sent3 -> int1: the fanion is a kind of a frontispiece.; void -> assump1: Let's assume that the fanion is a kind of a trainbandsman.; int1 & assump1 -> int2: the fanion is a frontispiece and a trainbandsman.; int2 -> int3: something is a frontispiece that is a kind of a trainbandsman.; int3 & sent21 -> int4: the gully is permissible.; sent10 & sent19 -> int5: the Mesa is permissible and is a kind of a bombproof.; sent5 & int5 -> int6: the gully is not permissible.; int4 & int6 -> int7: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int7 -> int8: the fanion is not a trainbandsman.;
there exists something such that it federalizes uninsurability and it is a foredeck.
sent17 -> int9: if the fanion is permissible it does federalize uninsurability and is not a frontispiece.;
$hypothesis$ = the fact that the hydroflumethiazide does not house dichotomy is not wrong. ; $context$ = sent1: if something is not a trainbandsman and it is not a frontispiece it houses dichotomy. sent2: that that the gully is non-permissible thing that is not a bombproof does not hold hold if the Mesa is not non-Hemingwayesque. sent3: the fact that the fanion is not a tug but it suffers chirp does not hold. sent4: the fanion is a frontispiece if that it does not tug and suffers chirp is false. sent5: the gully is impermissible if the Mesa is impermissible and it does bombproof. sent6: the heretic is not a tug. sent7: there exists something such that it is a frontispiece. sent8: something suffers chirp. sent9: the fanion does not house dichotomy. sent10: if the Mesa is not Hemingwayesque then it is permissible and it is a bombproof. sent11: the hydroflumethiazide suffers chirp. sent12: the Mesa is not permissible if the gully is permissible and it is a bombproof. sent13: there is something such that it is a trainbandsman. sent14: something is not a kind of a trainbandsman and it is not a frontispiece if it is permissible. sent15: if the fanion does house dichotomy then the hydroflumethiazide house dichotomy. sent16: the fanion is a tax-increase. sent17: if the fact that something is permissible hold then it does federalize uninsurability and is not a frontispiece. sent18: the fact that the Micmac does not slacken and is not a Italic is wrong. sent19: the Mesa is not Hemingwayesque. sent20: if the Amerindian is not an ascension then the Mesa is a kind of a minimalist and it is Hemingwayesque. sent21: if something is a frontispiece and it is a trainbandsman then that the gully is permissible is correct. ; $proof$ = 
sent4 & sent3 -> int1: the fanion is a kind of a frontispiece.; void -> assump1: Let's assume that the fanion is a kind of a trainbandsman.; int1 & assump1 -> int2: the fanion is a frontispiece and a trainbandsman.; int2 -> int3: something is a frontispiece that is a kind of a trainbandsman.; int3 & sent21 -> int4: the gully is permissible.; sent10 & sent19 -> int5: the Mesa is permissible and is a kind of a bombproof.; sent5 & int5 -> int6: the gully is not permissible.; int4 & int6 -> int7: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int7 -> int8: the fanion is not a trainbandsman.; __UNKNOWN__