(A) You are using a logical definition of omnipotence to assume God can do something that violates the definition of a thing. If God's omnipotence allows him to violate logic, God's omnipotence does not allow him to violate logic. Did that make sense? No, but that's about as meaningful of a discussion as we can have on the matter.
(B) Something is logically impossible if it violates its own definition. A = B, B != C therefore A = C is logically impossible. "Ergo, if doing something logically impossible is something we cannot comprehend, god
would could maybe still be able to do it, since he can might do what we cannot comprehend." Fixed. We cannot say what could or could not be done when logic is suspended. See (A) for explanation.