Yes but the topic is mail-in voting fraud. He was physically at the polling place and stuffing the box. It's fraud and should be punished, but it has nothing to do with mail-in voting fraud.
The example is a demonstration that a member of the opposition party to the incumbent President was both willing and able to commit election fraud for even a paltry sum of money in a local election. The implication is that election officials from that party cannot be trusted to NOT fraudulently influence the election. If they are willing & able to exploit System A, then they are probably WILLING to exploit System B, and it's likely they are ABLE to exploit System B because its security sucks.
Basic risk management principles would lead to implementing controls to either reduce the probability of the risk, or reduce the effective impact of the risk. The US has been stuck doing neither since the Bush/Gore election.
Clearly both major parties in the US are guilty of fraud. All the more reason to implement objective, unbiased security measures to ensure the integrity of the process.
