That was prosecution of a criminal who lived in New York for a crime committed in New York; I fail to see how it has any connection to the state regulating _companies_ who aren't based in New York but are listed in New York.

I'm not saying the prosecution was unmerited, just that SDNY has signaled that it will prosecute, as opposed to finding a reason to look the other way, as may be expectation of the connected elites. The DOJ for example is telling its lawyers to drop the corruption case against NY police chief Adams as well, for crimes committed in NY state that happen to be under federal jurisdiction [0].

[0] https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cm274m25e4ro

Unclear what business of the DoJ's that is. But, again, this seems totally unrelated to regulation or prosecution of non-NY companies which are merely listed in New York.

> Prosecuting and convicting the current head of state comes to mind.

Are you suggesting that the current head of state did not commit the crimes he was found guilty of by a jury?

See my other comment in this thread.

He was found guilty and our justice system is flawless.