See, you make this great big huge leap. He ends his bid for a 3rd term because there's fraud happening in his state THEREFOR he must be the one involved with the fraud.
That's a big jump without any evidence at all. What evidence, accusations, or anything at all leads to a conclusion that Walz is involved with the fraud?
Look, conservative, I get that none of you actually care about fraud and only use it as a means to attack political rivals, but at least try to use actual real world evidence.