The second part follows logically. If large movements of money manipulate the market then when would “manipulation” be used to claim an actor was misbehaving?

The second part follows logically. If large movements of money manipulate the market then when would “manipulation” be used to claim an actor was misbehaving? 1) they did a special kind of manipulation clearly against the rules 2) they didn’t do anything different, but the regulators decided they didn’t want them to. 2 would be exactly what I said - their activity has acquired political interest.