I'm dubious that the "Fed's money printer" had much of an effect on inflation. It certainly didn't cause the SVB or other banks to go under. The rate increases did that... in this case.
I don't think the particular path matters much. People tend to moralize banking, and post failure we tend to hunt for moral culprits. But... the historical fact is that banks fail sometimes, under all possible regulatory and commercial regimes. We have hundreds of years worth of evidence.
Banks have failure scenarios. The concept of a bank which takes deposits and invests them while maintaining 0% risk to depositors does not, and has never existed. We need to decide if money in the bank proverbial gold, or is it more like shares in a company? We just can't have both.