I'm not saying you're wrong in the aggregate, but can't you make a better argument? How can noting two people who went to jail for one reason be "all the proof you need"?
The context here is the rich and powerful. A reality show actor is not in that group and doesn't have those priveledges. Prosecuting someone like that does not make the powerful uncomfortable by setting a precedent so it's done all the time.
But the only time one of their in-group is sent to prison is when it hurts other rich and powerful.
There are investment fraud prosecutions literally all the time, they just get 5-10 years in prison usually, not life. They aren't on national news because few people know the scammer or the victims.
I'm not saying you're wrong in the aggregate, but can't you make a better argument? How can noting two people who went to jail for one reason be "all the proof you need"?