The lack of regulation and enforcement by government agencies and a disinterested or powerless consumer base seems to be the root cause of almost all her issues

The lack of regulation and enforcement by government agencies and a disinterested or powerless consumer base seems to be the root cause of almost all her issues, not limited liability. Because the repercussions of catastrophic events aren't enough to bankrupt companies like Exxon, Dow, and BP, limited liability is irrelevant in those cases. In my opinion, a more coherent argument for her position (which I don't agree with at all to be clear) would be to find examples of companies that did go bankrupt after some negative event they caused and highlight how the limited liability of the corporation shielded bad actors from punishment they arguably deserved.