Jury instructions on gang motive

1. Could the Second Circuit have rationally concluded that the instructions did not permit conviction if the jury found the enterprise motivation to be "incidental or insubstantial" where the district court instructed the jury to acquit only if it found petitioner "was not motivated at all" by his gang membership? 2. Could the instructional error be harmless beyond a reasonable doubt where there was substantial evidence from the government's linchpin witness as well as from Petitioner himself supporting the conclusion that Petitioner had no gang-related motive for the killing? 3. Did the Second Circuit fulfill its obligation to this Court by declaring that any instructional error was harmless absent any explanation of that conclusion? 4. Was the trial court’s order contrary to this Court’s jurisprudence by establishing two sets of rules: one that permits sharp government criticism of defense counsel, and another that shields the government from similar, justified scrutiny?