Hey All. I'm going to start periodically posting a layman's guide to some of the crimes by Trump and co. If you find it helpful, please let me know and I'll keep at it. Let's start with some basics: CONSPIRACY TO COMMIT AN OFFENSE AGAINST THE UNITED STATES, 18 U.S. CODE SEC. 371

One person committing a crime is dangerous. Two or more people working together to break our country’s laws presents an even greater risk of harm to victims & to society generally. In other words, 2 criminal heads are worse than 1. Because the law recognizes the enhanced danger

presented when criminals work together to do wrong, "conspiracy" is an independent, separately chargeable crime. A conspiracy is simply an agreement (express or implied) between two or more people to commit a crime, plus at least one step (called an “overt act”) toward

the commission of that crime. For example, if a bad guy robs a person he can be charged with robbery. If two bad guys rob a person together, each can be charged with robbery, but they can also be charged with the separate crime of conspiracy to rob.

The law of conspiracy has three important consequences. First, it increases the applicable prison time. Second, every co-conspirator is legally responsible for every crime committed by every other co-conspirator. For example,

let's assume that one conspirator (Joe) drives the getaway car for his fellow conspirator (Sam). After Joe drives Sam to the bank, Sam runs into the bank, kills the bank teller, takes the money, jumps into the getaway vehicle and Joe drives Sam away from the scene.

Joe, the getaway driver, can be charged with and convicted of the murder and the bank robbery even though Sam is the one who killed the teller and took the loot. Third, although it’s down in the legal weeds, the rules of hearsay don’t apply to co-conspirator statements.

In other words, let’s assume Sam says to a friend, “man, you should have seen how Joe was driving after our bank heist – a regular Mario Andretti!” That statement ordinarily would be inadmissible hearsay in a trial against Joe because it was a statement made by Sam. But because

co-conspirator statements are admissible at trial against ALL members of the conspiracy, Sam’s statement can help sink Joe in court. Trust me when I say, prosecutor’s love co-conspirator liability. Tomorrow's installment: how might the law of conspiracy apply to Trump and co.?

*Quick note to the the legal purists: I'm leaving out some of the more technical aspect of co-conspirator liability and admissibility of co-conspirator statements, like "during the course of" and "in furtherance of" for ease of explanation.