Isn't buying political influence with money what most people with absurd amounts of money do? I don't like it one bit either, but it's hardly unique to SBF.

With SBF, there seems to be this attempt at drawing guilt-by-association because of his donations to the Democratic Party. I don't think this makes a lot of sense.

For an example on the other end of the parliamentary spectrum, say, if Musk's future Twitter profits (good luck with that) were to come from the savings from firing half of the company's employees, and he then donated those to the Republican Party, it would be absurd to blame the Republican Party for the loss of jobs that it indirectly benefited from.

Obviously firing employees is not equivalent to fraud, and donating illicit profits could be part of a scheme to launder them. But unless a causal link can be proven, it all looks like speculation to me.