The O’Donnell & C. Daugherity Report
C: “»One of them must be lying« … God, if I had a nickel for every time someone proposed that two not very distinct observations couldn’t possible be true at the same time. It so infuriates me.
I think this third report which is sadly not written by Douglas Gold, but by two other gentlemen, Jeffrey O’Donnell and Walter C. Daugherity, raises some claims that need proper refutation.
The refutation comes in the form of District Attorney Daniel P. Rubenstein’s analysis of the third report. Not the two first, which he in fact refuses to comment on.”
Rubenstein:
[…] my role and the scope of my decision is limited to a conclusion about potential criminal activity. I find no evidence that votes were intentionally counted improperly. My role does not include decisions on certifying or decertifying elections.
G: “Well, good that the attorney himself washes his hands too. If I get the time, I will read up on Dominion’s claims in their defamation lawsuit trial. Perhaps they can explain why they deserve their certification.
But note that after almost four years, Dominion have only met in trial once with Rudy Giuliani’s team and once with Sidney Powell’s team. And the court proceedings have been sealed. The Fox lawsuit ended in settlement, as we know.”
C: “Ouch, shame. Looking forward to their response on hopefully a lot of questions.
Well, Rubenstein has done some investigation in the main claim of the third Mesa Report, which describes how a strange copying of the database took place a few days after general elections began in October 2020. The report speculates on the causality of that copying event. Jeffrey O’Donnell says it will have to be either an automated event or a nefarious intrusion. Human intervention is ruled out based on his interviews with the election workers. He claims to have interviewed all the workers present. Rubenstein refutes that any of the workers had been interviewed. He gets that from asking those present in the room.”
M: “And now you are furious because you suspect the two didn’t ask the same people. Perhaps Rubenstein missed a few people to ask. Perhaps the authors of the Mesa report relied on indirect witnesses.”
G: “Perhaps this O’Donnell is a con man?”
C: “All possible. But the latter is a judgment call barring actual arguments. We should refrain from taking sides based on nothing but our preferences.”
M: “Or worse: Pure cynicism.”
G: “For the record, I don’t think he is a fraud. We all state our cases with all the evidence we can muster in support of it. In a court room it is all there is: Two attorneys proving the innocence or guilt each day for someone new. Judges must be well verses in tipping the scale towards the better proof. The best you can do is do your due diligence and present your case in good conscience.”
M: “And then we’re back to the problem that CRT is trying to address: Court rooms are not at all like mathematicians establishing rigorous proofs. Prejudices have ample opportunity to weigh in.”
G: “Again, I disagree. Take any case, boil it down to nomenclature and basic statements, you get an equation that can be solved. Person X did Y to Z which under the law should provide you a penalty of Q”
M: “Gerald, I would love to agree with you on that, but I suspect that it is exactly the obviousness of the procedure that makes it seem bulletproof and just, but it strips away all possible mitigating circumstances. We have plenty of wiggle room for twisting reality, all allowed in a court room: X killed Y versus X killed Y in self defence.”
C: “Could we get back to the report?”
Mesa Report #3
C: “Off the bat, I want to say that the report is both laudable in that it constitutes a very serious attempt to decipher the events as described by what logs they could retrieve, and that they are very thorough. On the flip side, while the authors are good at suggesting possible explanations, they are also a bit too quick at ruling out more natural ones. I could easily come up with an explanation or two for the copying of databases. Less easily for the incomplete copying, but still, I could probably manage. Dominion themselves, oh so easily. Perhaps they have somewhere I haven’t spotted.
Having said that, I read both the report and Rubensteins counter report. Sadly, I think Rubenstein avoided explaining some of the most important questions raised. He did provide a possible explanation as to why the database was copied, but not to the serious question if the copy was done correctly or whether votes were lost in the process.”
G: “And what was the explanation?”
C: “They fumbled over something in the adjudication process and tried to rectify it by not completely following procedure. In the end, they had to start over on adjudication for that batch completely. So they did a reset procedure. The surveillance cameras support this, says Rubenstein. People get a lot out of a few pixels.”
M: “But since we know from the trial that the recount of the physical ballots yielded the same result, we are back to the former conclusion: Either there was no noticeable election fraud committed in Colorado, or there was fraud, yet, the latter is contingent on a serious violation of chain of custody, which is a very big declaration of mistrust levelled against the election officials.”
C: “That is what I have tried in vain to establish: Can the system protect against a fradulent election worker rescanning the same ballot twice or perhaps even replacing physical ballots with doctored ones? I can’t find confirmation in the Dominion manual that scanning the same vote twice would produce an error, but an FBI interview of an senior worker from the Fulton County viral incident indicates that doing to would result in an error. I need to figure out how and why. The ballots that is being fed into the counting machines are QR code marked. So the same ballot seen again will flash up. It would appear based on the manual that one task is to convert ordinary ballots into QR-stamped ones which is then used instead. I can’t judge yet. The manual us huge.”
A Bird’s Perspective
G: “Could anybody tell me why this report was done at all? Finally it dawned upon me that to look up the election outcome for all of Mesa County in the 2020. Apparently Trump won by 2 out of 3 votes. Why do they insist that the vote was stolen then?”
C: “Biden won Colorado as such, if that means anything. No, I wonder the same thing.”
Miranda was looking at some of the piles of material Christine had gathered. She got to the Fingerprints of Fraud video series by Jeffrey O’Donnell a.k.a. Lone Raccoon himself.
While watching the opening titles, her facial expression kind of froze. After a little while she stopped.
M: “Fellows! I think I need to take a different route. You carry on, see what you can find. I need to look no further. All we are reading, all the courtroom transcripts and FBI investigations we can dig up, opens no doors to understanding what the ruckus is all about.”
With that she had clearly caught Christine’s and Gerald’s attention.
G: “That’s it? After few seconds of watching you have unravelled everything?”
M: “Please see the opening titles.”
They did, looked up and didn’t get it.
M: “We are trying to figure out if election fraud is even possible. But everything in the American public sphere is purely about momentum.
First we have transform our reality completely. Repeat their words, walk in their shoes, and experience their shock, their horror, their nightmare: When they went to bed, Trump had a massive lead, confirming what they knew was true. The people wanted Trump’s sanity, not the insanity of a powerful elite who is ready to sacrifice the hordes of disempowered. Who have no sympathy for the ordinary struggling individual. When they woke up, something sinister had happened. Something that defies proper explanation. When they tune in to CNN, they see a slick news anchor with a confident mien explain it away with “overnight changes”. It just changed. That’s the reason they lost the only game that matters. »Because«. It just so happened while they slept. They forgot to watch.”
Gerald and Christine were slowly catching up.
M: “Jeffrey O’Donnell adds the next piece to the puzzle: While the world was sleeping, several key states stopped counting and when they resumed, Biden’s numbers accelerated rapidly. Imagine you one moment wake up to a paragon of deceit. Your only thought is “this can’t be!”. Then in that state, someone provides you with an explanation that is sucked into your brain like oxygen to a fire.
Foul play.
Perpetrated by a class of overlords cowardly remaining out of sight, but efficaciously able to accomplish anything they want. Even sack a president.
We have to work our way into the mental state of sixty million voters, namely, how could it be anything but fraud? A huge subterfuge orchestrated by the powers that be to exclude the common man from their power schemes.”
G: “Alright, we’ll split the difference and give them benefit of the doubt: Ordinary republicans are just as afraid that a ‘powerful elite’ will win with the Democratic Party as their rag doll as the ordinary working democrat is afraid of the strong man, in whom they see Hitler reincarnate, taking over.”
M: “They are each other’s nightmare. What one is hoping for, the other fears.”
G: “It simply means we should focus on gathering election data to figure out if the events at election night are ordinary for an election or not.”
M: “Not too hasty. You want to return to statistics and fact as fast as you can. But we need to understand the emotional roller coaster of both these completely different psychologies. Everyone from Trump to the basest of voters.
Imagine you went to bed one night having a glimmer of hope for the future, that your coming months and years will not be marred by uncertainty, despair. Then it all flips in the dead of night and after that, the country seems to embark on some kind of nightmarish roller coaster ride.
Look at the commands Trump has issued so far: MAGA-people are not bluffers: What they say scares them really does scare them.”
C: “You remember that story about an election worker who during the night pulled out a suitcase of ballots and started scanning them in?”
G: “Yes, the Fulton County incident.”
C: “The FBI came up empty handed. Apparently workers had been ordered home late at night, but a few minutes later it was decided by higher ranking people that the count should continue. In lieu of your discussion there, it is all the more embarrassing that that little manoeuvre managed to throw off all observers and media from the room.”
M: “Absolutely. How could they make such a blunder in an election everybody knew would be contentious? Trick all observers and media to go home, then call the workers back late at night and carry on counting. The pressure of course was also to provide a result as early as possible. Or who knows! Perhaps something deceitful really did happen after hours.”
G: “Faster counting! No machines! Only paper trail! More work, fewer workers, DOGE them down! The GOP wants everything for nothing. I’m looking forward to the ensuing chaos in 2028.
All the measures they now take are aimed at actions taken years ago to solve exactly the problems they now are going to reintroduce. Here: One amongst many statistics from the Brennan Center showing that Blacks and Latinos spend most time in queues waiting to vote. And look, Pew Research finds that most Blacks, Asian and Latinos mostly voted for Biden. What a simple solution to get more votes: Close the polls before the long line of disenfranchised have had a chance to vote for the other guy.”
C: “Slow down, Gerald. I’m also reading that survey. 2020 shows wide pro-Dem margin amongst Blacks, but not quite so wide a margin amongst Latinos. Closer to a tie.”
M: “Yes, slow down, Gerald. You are also missing my point from before: We three also think via the same pattern, the brain’s cycle of reality: 1) We encounter something factual to which our psychological mechanisms react. 2) Something inside us swells, kind of a voice, but fuzzily, a realisation that lends our thinking a new clarity. Let us call it the ghost of suspicion. 3) The ghost takes over.”
G: “Oh Miranda, you and your freak speak.”
M: “I mean it. We need to dispel any and all grand narratives before they control our thinking. At least, we must be able to enumerate them as we go along.”
G: “Good luck. I stick to the old and trustworthy grand narratives of statistics and clarity.”
Christine was watching the two of them go at each other.
She was thinking about the election deniers’ attempt to look at big data patterns. It felt like shaky ground and she didn’t feel prepared for it. Perhaps they had to take a plunge?
Miranda wanted to talk mass psychology and movements.
Gerald wanted to move along to greener pastures. He was reading the FBI report on the Fulton County incident.
G: “Well, I wish I could say the same thing as this Republican observer who also went home that night too early. That earned him a lot of calls from irate fellow Republicans, so he remarked that it would be the last time he volunteered as an observer. He »was done with it«. What a sympathetic fellow!”
/ПРИЗРАК