Not one side or the other, but this is also just as often found to be true in reverse. Kinda sucks, especially when your viewpoint is supported by a person’s achievements/views/whatever. This guy could have been potentially sabotaging Soviet agriculture (maybe even in support of his larger views of how things should be, hard to say) and spying for Britain (probably more of a stretch considering he was the better/more true to the real goal person for the job which was probably not in line with any of Britain’s priorities). But people do have weaknesses. Sometimes our idea of a person due to their beliefs conflict with their actions. It doesn’t make him any less the better candidate for his position. However, it is difficult to determine without bias whether this was a case of trumped up charges or possibly a man with good intentions that did commit some crimes. I’m inclined to agree that he was probably a convenient scapegoat because, Stalin. But for the sake of a fair argument I think these claims should at least be researched before everyone jumps on the down vote train.

Then they just say “oh yeah this is a high tax rate for me since I’m poor right now, but it will stay the same no matter how much I make!”