> Suppose that's true. So what? We analyze the results. We apply science. It can't change the result if it wasn't supposed to. If you're a heterosexual man, im

> Suppose that's true. So what? We analyze the results. We apply science. It can't change the result if it wasn't supposed to. If you're a heterosexual man, imagine asking your spouse for a paternity test on your children. And when that goes over like a lead balloon (which it would), imagine replying "So what? We analyze the results. We apply science. It can't change the result if it wasn't supposed to." > you can't be accused of covering up a fraud that wasn't actually there. Which is what happens in the alternative. So you think that Trump has no problem complaining about fraud when he has no evidence, but won't complain about fraud after an investigation shows there was none? Not a chance—he'll just complain that the investigation was a fraud as well.