these instructions did ■not prejudice him on that score. To the extent the instructions were aimed at the RICO charge, the district court did not abuse its discretion in finding that the evidence did not suggest Fernandez’s involvement in the conspiracy was limited to a mere purchase or sale of drugs. Moreover, a drug sale can be a predicate act supporting a RICO charge. See 18 U.S.C. § 1961(1). And the district court’s detailed jury instructions, including the requirement that Fernandez “agreed that either [he] or a co-conspirator would conduct or participate, either directly or indirectly, in the conduct of the affairs of the [Mafia] enterprise through a pattern of racketeering activity,” allayed any risk that the jury concluded that a mere drug purchase or sale was th Cir. 2007) (<HOLDING>); United States v. Spitler, 800 F.2d 1267,
holding that the official charged with responsibility to act must be an official within the doj with the authority to act in the circumstances holding police officer is a public official holding that bribing a public official does not amount to a conspiracy with that official to extort the briber under the hobbs act holding that impossibility is not a defense to attempts or conspiracy under the hobbs act holding that where a public official takes discretionary action that the official knows will directly benefit a financial interest that the official has concealed in violation of a state criminal law that official has deprived the public of his honest services under  1346