Earlier quoted context omitted.
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"?
> Do you get upset at criminal defense lawyers who defend people who are obviously guilty ... 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 ca…
Similarly, the system requires that anyone (including shareholders or employees of companies) be able to communicate with their political representatives about political policy. Even if sometimes this results in bad outcomes in specific situations.