How about giving each other immunity from the adverse affects of fraud?

Sure, the flu, or the latest bio weapon from China, harms people and it would be nice to give each other immunity from that, but seriously, what is this attack on our bodies precisely? If fraud is in place, then not only do you not know what this attack on our bodies is, neither are your care givers armed with that knowledge, when the affects of fraud are attacking our minds.

How about the lethal injection people are lured or forced into taking that is claimed to be a possible defense against the bio weapon or whatever causes people to get sick these days?

Does the lethal injection give people immunity or not? Some people die from the lethal injection, it says so right in the lethal injection warning publications. How does fraud work to keep people misinformed about the lethal injection claimed to NOT be a method of giving people immunity from the bio weapon?

How does fraud work?

There is no evidence of fraud, so I can't even ask the question about how does the fraud work, let along inspire any answers whatsoever from anyone.

Then, there is the non-election fraud. No one has been elected fairly since The Golden Age of Greece thousands of years ago, and even then the evidence suggests that it was significantly difficult to defeat the affects of fraud then, but I can't ask, and I can't answer that either.

But some people did ask and answer that question.

The Athenian Constitution:
Government by Jury and Referendum
by Roderick T. Long

"The practice of selecting government officials randomly (and the Athenians developed some fairly sophisticated mechanical gadgets to ensure that the selection really was random, and to make cheating extremely difficult) is one of the most distinctive features of the Athenian constitution. We think of electoral politics as the hallmark of democracy; but elections were almost unknown at Athens, because they were considered paradigmatically anti-democratic. Proposals to replace sortition with election were always condemned as moves in the direction of oligarchy.

"Why? Well, as the Athenians saw it, under an electoral system no one can obtain political office unless he is already famous: this gives prominent politicians an unfair advantage over the average person. Elections, they thought, favor those wealthy enough to bribe the voters, powerful enough to intimidate the voters, flashy enough to impress the voters, or clever enough to deceive the voters. The most influential political leaders were usually Horsemen anyway, thanks to their social prominence and the political following they could obtain by dispensing largesse among the masses. (One politician, Kimon, won the loyalty of the poor by leaving his fields and orchards unfenced, inviting anyone who was hungry to take whatever he needed.) If seats on the Council had been filled by popular vote, the Horsemen would have disproportionately dominated it — just as, today, Congress is dominated by those who can afford expensive campaigns, either through their own resources or through wealthy cronies. Or, to take a similar example, in the United States women have had the vote for over half a century, and yet, despite being a majority of the population, they represent only a tiny minority of elected officials. Obviously, the persistence of male dominance in the economic and social sphere has translated into women mostly voting for male candidates. The Athenians guessed, probably rightly, that the analogous prestige of the upper classes would lead to commoners mostly voting for aristocrats.

"That is why the Athenians saw elections as an oligarchical rather than a democratic phenomenon. Above all, the Athenians feared the prospect of government officials forming a privileged class with separate interests of their own. Through reliance on sortition, random selection by lot, the Council could be guaranteed to represent a fair cross-section of the Athenian people — a kind of proportional representation, as it were. Random selection ensured that those selected would be representatives of the people as a whole, whereas selection by vote made those selected into mere representatives of the majority."

How does one, any ONE, any WHERE, any TIME, lessen the extremely destructive affects of an effective fraud?

What is the law?