I see the "fraudulent" thing as a hyperbolic way of saying "I strongly disagree" but I'd say that is a debatable point that reasonable people could disagree ove

I see the "fraudulent" thing as a hyperbolic way of saying "I strongly disagree" but I'd say that is a debatable point that reasonable people could disagree over. In American political debate, it is common to throw around names like "communist" and "fascist" to refer to your political opponents but that doesn't mean most people actually think the Democrats and Republicans really are the Communists and the Fascists. I think it's dangerous rhetoric because some people might believe it and act accordingly while others might genuinely be totalitarians and stay under the radar but it's the political culture we have. The child molester comparison does provide additional context in this case that makes it much easier to interpret "fraudulent" literally rather than as hyperbole.