Here, it seems like (1) the DNC, the MSM, and the Biden Campaign (collectively DncMsmBc) represented that Biden was not mentally impaired, (2) Biden was in fact mentally impaired (as admitted by Hunter Biden in text messages prior to the vote on Nov 3 2020), (3) whether a candidate is mentally impaired is material to the voting public, (4) the DncMsmBc knew Biden was mentally impaired (5) the DncMsmBc intended that the voting public vote based on not knowing the truth of Biden's mental impairment, (6) the voting public was ignorant of Biden's mental impairment, (7) the voting public relied upon the DNC, the MSM, and the Biden campaign misrepresentation about the facts of Biden's mental impairment, (8) the voting public had a right to rely upon the DncMsmBc about the Biden's mental impairment, and (9) the voting public has suffered irreparable damage from having voted for Biden.

In the United States, common law generally identifies nine elements needed to establish fraud: (1) a representation of fact; (2) its falsity; (3) its materiality; (4) the representer’s knowledge of its falsity or ignorance of its truth; (5) the representer’s intent that it should be acted upon by the person in the manner reasonably contemplated; (6) the injured party’s ignorance of its falsity; (7) the injured party’s reliance on its truth; (8) the injured party’s right to rely thereon; and (9) the injured party’s consequent and proximate injury. See, e.g., Strategic Diversity, Inc. v. Alchemix Corp., 666 F.3d 1197, 1210 n.3, 2012 U.S. App. LEXIS 1175, at *25 n.3 (9th Cir. 2012) (quoting Staheli v. Kauffman, 122 Ariz. 380, 383, 595 P.2d 172, 175 (1979)); Rice v. McAlister, 268 Ore. 125, 128, 519 P.2d 1263, 1265 (1975); Heitman v. Brown Grp., Inc., 638 S.W.2d 316, 319, 1982 Mo. App. LEXIS 3159, at *4 (Mo. Ct. App. 1982); Prince v. Bear River Mut. Ins. Co., 2002 UT 68, ¶ 41, 56 P.3d 524, 536-37 (Utah 2002).

https://www.mitchell-attorneys.com/common-law-fraud