[(∀X)Pax • ∼(∃X)Pxa] ⊃ (∀X)(Pax • ∼Pxa)

[(∀x) Pax • ∼(∃x) Pxa] ⊃ (∀x) (Pax • ∼Pxa)
-Consider assuming '(∀x) Pax • ∼(∃x) Pxa' for a conditional proof of the above logical truth. Which of the
Following propositions is a legitimate second step in that proof?

A) Assume '(∀x) Pax' for a nested indirect proof.
B) Assume ~(∀x) Pax' for a nested indirect proof.
C) ~(∃x) Pxa
D) (∀x) ~Pxa
E) ∼(∃x) Pxa • (∀x) Pax