Incorrect.
lol. It genuinely doesn't matter to you how clearly you're shown to be wrong or caught in a lie, does it?
The author is talking about fraud generically
No, he isn't. He's talking quite specifically about the way he believes "the public" were misled by certain information being suppressed.
I don't agree with him for reasons I've outlined, but he's not talking about fraud at all actually - certainly not in the way Trump was talking about it. Trump's claims have been repeatedly shown to be false - or, at least, no evidence has been presented which stood up to any scrutiny.
and doesn't go into AZ specifically
He doesn't go in to any audits. He doesn't even mention the AZ one. So why are you lying? Your claim was that the
"British media reviewed the Arizona audit results and came to the conclusion that the election was a fraud"
First, it wasn't "the British media", it was one opinion piece by one person who hardly has a reputation for truthfulness.
From his Wiki page:
In 2010 he was the first journalist to have a complaint against a blog post he had written to be upheld by the Press Complaints Commission, over a claim that he could not prove about the African-Caribbean community.
and
A November 2011 article by Liddle in The Spectator about the trial of two men involved in the murder of Stephen Lawrence led to the magazine being prosecuted for breaching reporting restrictions. A court hearing was held in June 2012, in which The Spectator pleaded guilty to contempt of court and accepted a fine of £5,000 plus costs
So you've backed another winner there.
Secondly, he hasn't "reviewed the Arizona audit results". Or, if he has, he doesn't even mention them.
And lastly, he explicitly rules out postal vote fraud in the article. I quoted the part where he does that.
Literally every part of your claim is a lie. Or, let's be generous, it's you being lazy, getting excited by a headline and not bothering to do the most superficial research into your own claim. So lazy or liar, which is it?
it is clear that the recent events prompted the fraud article since it came out the day after the audit news went around.
I suspect the timing is not a coincidence, it's a clickbait article with a clickbait headline and the timing was clearly designed to further boost clicks. A bit embarrassing that you fell for it, really.
The rest of your post is your typical Bishopian attempt to divert distract from your exposed lies or laziness.