the leeway is not nonterritorial if the wetter is not a capitalist.
sent1: there is something such that the fact that it is not non-intermediate or it is a professional or both does not hold. sent2: the leeway is not a capitalist if the wetter is not apopemptic. sent3: either something is an intermediate or it is not professional or both. sent4: the wetter does not reprise rhodanthe. sent5: if the wetter does reprise rhodanthe and it does gin buffoonery then it is apopemptic. sent6: if the wetter is apopemptic and does disown popinjay then that the leeway is not nonterritorial is correct. sent7: the leeway does spiel. sent8: if the wetter is a spiel it does not reprise rhodanthe and it gins buffoonery. sent9: if the wetter catholicizes and it is a kind of a capitalist then it is a kind of a spiel. sent10: the leeway reprises rhodanthe if it is not a kind of a capitalist and is nonterritorial. sent11: if the wetter is not a capitalist the leeway is nonterritorial. sent12: there is something such that the fact that it is not non-intermediate or not a professional or both is not correct. sent13: if the wetter does not reprise rhodanthe and does gin buffoonery the fact that it is apopemptic is not incorrect. sent14: the wetter catholicizes if there is something such that that it is intermediate and/or not professional is false. sent15: the wetter does disown popinjay. sent16: the leeway is not nonterritorial if the wetter is a capitalist. sent17: if the popinjay is nonterritorial but it is not bibless that it is a conenose hold. sent18: The popinjay does disown wetter. sent19: there exists something such that that it is not an intermediate is right. sent20: there exists something such that it is a professional. sent21: if the leeway does catholicize and is nonterritorial then the wetter is not a kind of a capitalist. sent22: the wetter does spiel if it catholicizes and it is not a kind of a capitalist. sent23: that the fact that the wetter does not reprise rhodanthe is correct if the wetter spiels is true.
sent12 & sent14 -> int1: the wetter does catholicize.; void -> assump1: Let's assume that the wetter is not a capitalist.; int1 & assump1 -> int2: the wetter catholicizes and is not a capitalist.; int2 & sent22 -> int3: the wetter is a spiel.; int3 & sent8 -> int4: that the wetter does not reprise rhodanthe and does gin buffoonery hold.; int4 & sent13 -> int5: the wetter is apopemptic.; int5 & sent15 -> int6: the wetter is apopemptic thing that does disown popinjay.; int6 & sent6 -> int7: that the leeway is not nonterritorial is not incorrect.; [assump1] & int7 -> hypothesis;
$hypothesis$ = the leeway is not nonterritorial if the wetter is not a capitalist. ; $context$ = sent1: there is something such that the fact that it is not non-intermediate or it is a professional or both does not hold. sent2: the leeway is not a capitalist if the wetter is not apopemptic. sent3: either something is an intermediate or it is not professional or both. sent4: the wetter does not reprise rhodanthe. sent5: if the wetter does reprise rhodanthe and it does gin buffoonery then it is apopemptic. sent6: if the wetter is apopemptic and does disown popinjay then that the leeway is not nonterritorial is correct. sent7: the leeway does spiel. sent8: if the wetter is a spiel it does not reprise rhodanthe and it gins buffoonery. sent9: if the wetter catholicizes and it is a kind of a capitalist then it is a kind of a spiel. sent10: the leeway reprises rhodanthe if it is not a kind of a capitalist and is nonterritorial. sent11: if the wetter is not a capitalist the leeway is nonterritorial. sent12: there is something such that the fact that it is not non-intermediate or not a professional or both is not correct. sent13: if the wetter does not reprise rhodanthe and does gin buffoonery the fact that it is apopemptic is not incorrect. sent14: the wetter catholicizes if there is something such that that it is intermediate and/or not professional is false. sent15: the wetter does disown popinjay. sent16: the leeway is not nonterritorial if the wetter is a capitalist. sent17: if the popinjay is nonterritorial but it is not bibless that it is a conenose hold. sent18: The popinjay does disown wetter. sent19: there exists something such that that it is not an intermediate is right. sent20: there exists something such that it is a professional. sent21: if the leeway does catholicize and is nonterritorial then the wetter is not a kind of a capitalist. sent22: the wetter does spiel if it catholicizes and it is not a kind of a capitalist. sent23: that the fact that the wetter does not reprise rhodanthe is correct if the wetter spiels is true. ; $proof$ = 
sent12 & sent14 -> int1: the wetter does catholicize.; void -> assump1: Let's assume that the wetter is not a capitalist.; int1 & assump1 -> int2: the wetter catholicizes and is not a capitalist.; int2 & sent22 -> int3: the wetter is a spiel.; int3 & sent8 -> int4: that the wetter does not reprise rhodanthe and does gin buffoonery hold.; int4 & sent13 -> int5: the wetter is apopemptic.; int5 & sent15 -> int6: the wetter is apopemptic thing that does disown popinjay.; int6 & sent6 -> int7: that the leeway is not nonterritorial is not incorrect.; [assump1] & int7 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__