Livermore tested positive for cocaine and was suspended for the rest of the season. His reasons for taking it were widely accepted. Nobody, afaik, was suggesting he should have been fired for moral reasons. And rightly so.If you can’t see the difference with Livermore then you’re clutching matey
Zambrano tested positive for whatever it was, he's been suspended for 2 seasons, subject to appeal. He claims it was an innocent mistake, impossible to prove either way but he gets no benefit of the doubt. By saying it's morally wrong to have signed him is tantamount to firing him.
Is there really that much difference?