Many thanks Richard! Using the convention that (1) refers to equation (1) in my essay, etc., my preliminary response follows:
1. Given that my work is found in an essay contest, let's agree that it's an essay (of some sort).
2. Given your problem with my math, let's agree that it's an essay in need of an editor.
3. Given my respect for your tenacity in matters Bellian, let's see if I can develop as that editor. And let this be the end in view: the essay is either improved in its next incarnation or it's withdrawn!
4. Let the apprentice begin by re-titling the essay:
Commonsense local realism settles the physics in Bell-v-Einstein
where commonsense local realism (CLR) is carefully defined in the essay.
5. Given Appendix A, you are aware of the concrete and abstract models in Table A1; etc.
6. Given no math in Appendix A, we come to your difficulties in Section 1: Truth.
7. Therein (1)-(10) are presented as revealed truths; ie, truths revealed by Nature when interrogated correctly. Further, since they are presented as universal truths, they are represented in the language of mathematics, devoid of any native tongues.
8. Given that you understand an Expectation in QM, and that such are conditioned by the experiment under consideration, you will understand LHS(1) = (2).
9. Thus, sandwiched between LHS(1) and (2), we find RHS(1) named from the left and defined from the right.
10. The symbols in RHS(1) are then defined in (3)-(4). How then do you understand (3)-(4)?
Hoping this helps us along the way -- towards that end -- with my thanks again; Gordon