1. Can a person be convicted of conspiracy to violate a statute containing an element increasing the offense's severity, where that element is not actually met and no two conspirators believed or agreed it was met?

2. Can a person be convicted of conspiracy to violate a statute containing a severity-increasing element that is not actually met, where no member of the alleged conspiracy believed it was met?

3. This Court held in Lebron v. Nat'l Railroad Passenger Corp., 513 U.S. 374, 379 (1995), that "once a federal claim is properly presented, a party can make any argument in support of that claim," and in United States v. Olano, 507 U.S. 725, 733 (1993) that arguments cannot be unintentionally waived. Are those holdings inconsistent with circuit rules deeming arguments "waived" if inadvertently omitted from a party's opening brief on appeal, even if they are subsumed in a larger claim the brief raises?

Can a person be convicted of conspiracy to violate a statute containing an element increasing the offense's severity, where that element is not actually met and no two conspirators believed or agreed it was met?