I already quoted Credico above, where Credico himself urged the court not to pursue a charge of witness intimidation, as he himself felt there was no actual threat posed by Roger Stone to him.
If Credico himself urged the court not to pursue it, that to me smacks of malicious prosecution.
Similar to two interviewing FBI agents saying they were confident Michael Flyynn had not lied to them, but then prosecuting Flynn for perjury, and even threatening to prosecute Flynn's son as well to force Flynn to take the plea deal. As Hannity pointed out in the 18-minute clip from last night, even the stacked-up perjury counts are a contrivance by the FBI/DOJ, based on the fact that Stone allegedly lied to cover up no crime by Trump, so there is no root crime that the perjury allegations are stacked on, and likewise the added witness tampering charge. If I were arrested in a pre-dawn raid with 20-plus guns pointed at me and my wife, with someone in the FBI notifying CNN with a camera crew there in advance to film it, I think I would be defiant and less than cooperative too.
ESPECIALLY when dozens of others who are on Team Democrat who did far worse were never similarly investigated or prosecuted.
If others on the Democrat side were similarly prosecuted with the same zeal, then I'd say OK, that's the standard and Stone was treated fairly. But the others weren't prosecuted similarly, and it is blatantly one-sided and unfair. Especially in Stone's case, where it's all process crime, with no root crime. It's just a way to selectively prosecute a political opponent, to stack up a win and vindication for the failed Mueller investigation.
