Suppose that you are an intrepid reporter — accent on the "intrepid."  You witness voter fraud so vast that it reverses the outcome of a presidential election in a few states, enough to cause what should be the losing candidate to win.  As a reporter, what do you want to do?

You want to gather as many examples of voter fraud as you can and showcase them on your network.  You want to report what the losing candidate can do to undo the election outcome.  You want to find out how the courts are likely to deal with the cases coming its way.  Unfortunately, you work at Fox News.

Fox News was early in predicting that Arizona would go for Biden, even though the people at the network knew that the most Republican county in the state was not yet counted.  When they saw Trump's lead in Georgia dwindle to nothing, they reported it as though it were the weather.  When they heard Trump's claims of voter fraud, they found "experts" to proclaim that Trump had no evidence.

I credit Tucker Carlson, Sean Hannity, and Laura Ingraham for daring to bring up the subject.

Is there evidence of voter fraud?  A postal worker reports that his boss wanted him to backdate postmarks in Michigan.  The Pennsylvania Supreme Court legislated election procedure changes in the last few months.  Some ballots were found literally hiding under a rock in Arizona.  In all, thousands of votes were illegally cast.  This means that there are thousands of criminals on the loose.  This apparently does not count as evidence.

It may be that Fox is taking its philosophy of "we report, you decide" too literally.  These people are so afraid of appearing partisan that Democrats can commit any crime, and Fox is not interested.

Fox should remember the old saying: "Dog bites man — that's not news.  Man bites dog — that's news."  Apparently not if the man is a Democrat.

If Fox wants to win back the respect of conservatives, it should unleash its intrepid reporters.  Most conservatives would greatly enjoy learning how voter fraud can be committed, how much has occurred in past elections, and how successful prosecutions have been.  They would also like to hear from judicial scholars about how much proof it takes for courts to take action to punish the cheaters and correct inaccurate election results.  Fox, make yourselves great again.

Image: Gage Skidmore via Flickr, CC BY-SA 2.0.