It outlines that Michael Kail was convicted of wire fraud, mail fraud, and money laundering, so it seems the "preference of products for payments" was just a small piece of the puzzle here.
The wire fraud and mail fraud statutes are written to be vague enough that basically existing is a violation, money laundering is existing with money.
If they had real crimes they would have charged them, this is just some "because I don't like you" political bullshit.
Moving on, what I actually said, and what I actually meant, was that those laws are incredibly vague and have been used to convict more or less everything under the sun except actual wire or mail frauds.
If a conviction involves only wire, mail, and money laundering charges then it is because the only guilt that could be proven was axiomatic.
Pardon me for pausing a moment to ponder before picking up a stone and joining you.
Read the laws or remain ignorant, I don't care.