The argument here seems to be largely the same as saying that a wage slave should be satisfied with his salary because he is getting a salary at all.

I don’t think that in an obviously corrupt legal system, the focus should be on how to use this dysfunctional system against those who have shaped it over decades in such a way that their crimes become possible in the first place. There’s a term for that: window dressing.

However, it becomes very difficult when someone tries to dismiss legitimate criticism of rampant corruption as counterproductive. This amounts to a refusal to acknowledge that far-reaching reforms are necessary—in other words, to a defense of the status quo with the argument that the system is fine and that there is no problem at all.

I think US citizens would be well advised to realize that their legal system has not only permitted organized crime at the highest levels, but has actually made it possible in the first place. Otherwise, Trump would not be president, but would have been in prison for decades.