emptywheel

I'm not sure what you're referencing. In any case, you surely can read how the stuff charged is actually more conservative than how it has been used in the past.

Sorry. You said you had a precedent related to conspiracy. Do you have one?

what I linked to: http://www.ca5.uscourts.gov/opinions/pub/05/05-20319-CR0.wpd.pdf … Weissman's conspiracy counts were overturned. in Russian troll example, Weissman charged conspiracy rather than FEC offences, paying no attention to exhortation from 5th Circuit overturning earlier Weissman charges.

You're saying Enron was prosecuted for election fraud? And in DC?

for someone smart, you're going out of your way to miss point. There are thousands of specific offences in criminal code. Weissman, who has history of being overturned, likes to use conspiracy charges rather than specific offences. 5th Circ exhorted him not to. He still does it.

No. I'm discussing the law. You're treating the law like it's a tea society. The 5th Circuit does not "exhort." It writes opinions, that one of which is not relevant here. You can ignore the larger history of conspiracy in the US, or you can discuss law as it actually exists.