How can Samourai Wallet be a "money transmitter" if it merely provides noncustodial software that never accepts or transmits currency? See 31 C.F.R. 1010.100(ff)(5). This could be a more egregious injustice than the Ross Ulbricht case. 
Discussion
Everyone should read the indictment. https://www.justice.gov/media/1349321/dl
If CoinJoins are already illegal, then why did FinCEN see the need to propose rules last year specifically targeting them? https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2023/10/23/2023-23449/proposal-of-special-measure-regarding-convertible-virtual-currency-mixing-as-a-class-of-transactions?s=09#footnote-75-p72710
As has always been the case, governments will continue to make up rules and break them and selectively enforce them if and when it suits whatever agenda they decide whenever they decide it. What’s that Henry Kissinger quote? Something like: illegal we can do immediately but unconstitutional takes longer
I'm having a harder time arguing against count one. Constitutional arguments aside, 18 U.S.C § 1956(a)(1)(B)(I) is quite broad:
"Whoever, knowing that the property involved in a financial transaction represents the proceeds of some form of unlawful activity, conducts or attempts to conduct such a financial transaction which in fact involves the proceeds of specified unlawful activity—
...
knowing that the transaction is designed in whole or in part—
...
to conceal or disguise the nature, the location, the source, the ownership, or the control of the proceeds of specified unlawful activity ...."
You can't really argue that Samourai didn't "conduct[] ... a financial transaction" when they collected a fee from it.