I have no problems accepting the fact that politicians might hire crooks to do some things that are extra legal. The fact that they're incompetent criminals who get caught and who don't understand the internet, that worries me.
Illegal.
I have more problems with politicians hiring crooks to do illegal things for them, than with criminals being incompetent.
Look up the origin of the term "banana republic" if you don't believe me. Or just look through how many things we did in South/Central America due to the doctrine of manifest destiny.
So if we have to do something bad to ensure a steady supply of oil at a reasonable price, sure. I can accept that.
But we should be discerning enough to figure out who to hire, and how to GET AWAY WITH IT to avoid repercussions. If you're the president, there's a lot more at stake here than your campaign - we're talking about full blown war.
I think that skill in shadiness is transferrable across motives. If you can't plan a robbery of a convenience store for your own wallet, why should I let you plan the robbery of a bank to give it all away to charity?
The ends (sorta) matter in a moralistic sort of way. But the means matter much more. You're playing for higher stakes here, not just criminal prosecution, but a low level brush war in the middle east if you mess things up.
aka robbing from the poor and giving to the rich