Earlier quoted context omitted.
We can be upset at politicians for "selling out" to the lobbyists. We can be upset at lobbyists for pushing things that they know aren't in the best interests of consumers. We can be upset at businesses for wanting to take advantage of consumers for their own gain. All of these can be true at the same time.
Do you get upset at criminal defense lawyers who defend people who are obviously guilty (i.e. by getting clear and convincing evidence disqualified because of a procedural error?) Or, would you say something like "The outcomes are not perfect but that's how the system works and stays as fair as possible for everyone"?
This is an obvious Straw man[0] fallacy.
Intuit is a corporation engaged in lobbying efforts in order to retain and/or expand its market-share and not an individual needing representation in a criminal indictment.
Unless your position is that Intuit corporate officers should be criminally prosecuted, which, if that is the case, I apologize for my misunderstanding and can see your point.