If questioning the results of an election were a crime there would have been a round-up of Dems in 2016

 Washington Examiner:

Underlying the early morning June search of former Justice Department official Jeffrey Clark's home was an investigation into obstruction of justice, criminal conspiracy, and false statements, according to court documents.

Special agents with the DOJ searched Clark's Virginia home and seized his phone on June 20 to collect evidence as part of an investigation into possible violations of three different laws, Clark revealed in a filing with the D.C. Bar’s Board on Professional Responsibility. It is not clear whether he was the target of the criminal inquiry.

BODYCAM FOOTAGE SHOWS AUTHORITIES EXECUTING RAID OF JEFFREY CLARK'S HOME

"Mr. Clark asserts that '[o]n June 20, 2022, approximately a dozen armed agents of the Department of Justice’s Office of Inspector General executed a criminal search warrant at [Mr. Clark’s] home at around 7 a.m. and seized his electronic devices,' in connection with an investigation into violations of '18 U.S.C. § 1001, which relates to false statements, 18 U.S.C. § 371, which relates to conspiracy, and 18 U.S.C § 1512, which relates to obstruction of justice,'" the filing explained.

The filing pertained to a disciplinary case pending against Clark that was brought by the D.C. Bar’s board and first reported by CNN. The D.C. Bar’s disciplinary counsel issued an ethics complaint against Clark, saying he used his perch at the DOJ to boost election fraud claims.

News of the DOJ's raid of Clark's home sent tremors in conservative circles over the summer, but the reason for the raid was not clear at the time. Only some of the seized material from Clark was returned to him by Sept. 1, the outlet said. The department has been conducting an extensive review of the events of Jan. 6, 2021, and coinciding efforts to overturn the 2020 election.

So far, Clark has not been publicly charged with crimes in the inquiry, and the filing underscored that the raid "only means that the Department of Justice believed that Mr. Clark had evidence relating to the criminal investigation," not that he was "the target of a Grand Jury."

Clark, a prominent figure in the Jan. 6 committee hearings over the summer, had been eyed favorably by former President Donald Trump for the attorney general post in the twilight days of the administration, according to former Trump aides. Ultimately, Trump did not elevate Clark to attorney general before his departure from the White House.

Clark, who was assistant attorney general for the Environment and Natural Resources Division during the waning Trump White House days, trafficked in claims that election improprieties deprived Trump of victory in 2020. He prodded Jeffrey Rosen, who became acting attorney general after William Barr's resignation in December 2020, to send a letter to Georgia officials calling for a special session of the Georgia Legislature to address the election.
...

The Democrats have a problem when the shoe is on the other foot.  There is nothing wrong with raising questions about the validity of the vote.  It is called free speech.  If it were a problem there would have been a huge roundup of Democrats including Hillary Clinton.