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.