Earlier quoted context omitted.
You answered to the wrong comment maybe? Because that is not money laundering.
> that is not money laundering I’m willingly jumping into a hornet’s nest, but out of genuine curiosity, why?
An example, you have 1M cash but you need it in your bank account, because you want to buy a house or a car or groceries. If you just go to your bank with 1M in a briefcase a lot of people are going to ask you "where did that money came from?". But if you do ???? and you have a legit (or legit enough) excuse for that, you may get away with it and now you can use your money and people think you're a mastermind entrepreneur or something.
There's a reason why the first money launderers were laundromats and similar businesses, anything with plausible cash flow, because then you can go to the bank and tell them "I just run a very successful laundry business, and that's why I have a big bunch of $10 and $20 bills, some of them may have a bit of blood in them, though". Much more complex ways exist but the gist of it is this.
If you take legit money from someone's bank account, move it through Apple, then send it to Chile(?), then take it out(?) that's literally the opposite of what you'd like to achieve, hence why this argument is so absurd.