Consider the following premises. For all x_20, if x_20 were bored, then x_20 is a police officer. For all x_20, if x_20 were a politician, then x_20 is a police officer. For all x_20, x_20 will drive a car. There is at least one x_20 for which x_20 is bored or x_20 is a politician. Can we infer the following from them? For all x_20, neither x_20 will drive a car nor x_20 will drink water.
 From the fact that for all x_20, if x_20 were bored, then x_20 is a police officer, that for all x_20, if x_20 were a politician, then x_20 is a police officer, and that there is at least one x_20 for which x_20 is bored or x_20 is a politician we can infer that there is at least one x_20 for which x_20 is a police officer. From the fact that for all x_20, x_20 will drive a car, and that there is at least one x_20 for which x_20 is a police officer we can infer that there is at least one x_20 for which x_20 will drive a car and x_20 is a police officer. From the fact that there is at least one x_20 for which x_20 will drive a car and x_20 is a police officer we can infer that there is at least one x_20 for which x_20 will drive a car. Finally, from the fact that there is at least one x_20 for which x_20 will drive a car we can infer that there is at least one x_20 for which x_20 will drive a car or x_20 will drink water, which contradicts that For all x_20, neither x_20 will drive a car nor x_20 will drink water. Therefore, the answer is no.