Maxine Waters: Hillary Should Have Fired Comey, But Trump Shouldn’t Have

The Mother of All Blabbermouths, MOAB Maxine Waters appeared on MSNBC yesterday to ensure that the 130 viewers heard her earlier calls of impeachment properly as she attempted to explain away her hypocrisy over Comey’s firing in the classic Liberal circle-logic that she has come to exemplify.  The reporter actually appeared to be enjoying himself as he posed baited question after baited question toward Waters in a comical display of what appeared to be a police officer asking a DWI suspect if she had had anything to drink tonight.

REPORTER:  For more, I wanna bring in the Congresswoman herself, Maxine Waters, who is joining me now.  Congresswoman, we appreciate your time.  You obviously have been very critical of James Comey in the past.  You said that he had no credibility.  I assume that you support the president’s decision then to fire his FBI director.

WATERS:  No, I do not necessarily support the president’s decision.  If the president had not gone all over the country, praising him about the way he handled Hillary and the emails, if the president had not said he had confidence in him, if the president had not said he was a part of his team, then –

REPORTER:  But Congresswoman, I understand that in the past that he was praising him, but if you said that FBI Director James Comey had no credibility, wouldn’t you support the fact that the president, then-candidate Trump, now President Trump –

WATERS:  No, no, no…

REPORTER: – made the decision to get rid of him?

WATERS:  No, no, not necessarily.  And let me tell you something.

REPORTER:  Why not?

WATERS:  You have an investigation going on where the president is implicated…and this is a serious investigation…I’ve been trying to get people to focus on this connection, with the Kremlin, and with Putin…I have a resolution that I introduced in February!  I think there’s enough there that we know about the Kremlin and about Putin, uh, to be concerned about whether or not there was collusion.  I believe there was –

REPORTER:  So, to be clear –

WATERS:  – and I believe that they should have to connect the dots and get the facts because I think it will lead to the impeachment of this president.

REPORTER:  So, Congresswoman, respecting that…to be clear, you believe it would’ve been better to keep in place an FBI director who you said had no credibility to oversee this investigation than to find someone who you think would be a better choice?

WATERS:  No, but I believe the president thought that.  Don’t forget, you’re talkin’ about what some Democrat said, what I said, don’t forget…he was the president.  The president supported him, he had confidence in him, it was his – within his power and he had votes to keep him there –

REPORTER:  But you said he had no credibility.  It would seem to make sense that he should get rid of him.

WATERS:  I did – I absolutely – no!  No, no, no.  Under investigation.  This president basically has interfered with an investigation where he may be implicated.  That’s outrageous and that’s why we’re having so much of a conversation about it today.  Everybody is talking about it because this is highly unusual.

REPORTER:  The bottom line is that you think an FBI director without credibility would’ve been best served in this position to try to pursue this investigation.

WATERS:  The bottom line is, I think if the president, if the president had fired him when he first came in, uh, he would not have to be in a position now where he’s trying to make up a story –

REPORTER:  Understood.

WATERS:  – about why.  It does not meet the smell test.

REPORTER:  Understood.  So if Hillary Clinton had won the White House, would you have recommended that she fire FBI Director James Comey?

WATERS:  Well, let me tell you something.  If she had won the White House, I believe that, given what he did to her, and what he tried to do, she should’ve fired him.  Yes!

REPORTER:  So, she should’ve fired him, but he shouldn’t have fired him.  This is why I’m confused.

WATERS:  No.  No, you’re not confused.  If the president is implicated –

REPORTER:  I am confused.

WATERS:  – in an investigation, the president of the United States, who has a history of firing people who get close to him and his allies, like Flynn…like, um, like Miss Yates, he will fire them if he believes somehow they’re getting too close to him in these investigations.  And, so, no, I –

REPORTER:  Congresswoman –

WATERS:  I believe that the president of the United States should not have done this in the middle of an investigation.  That’s it!

REPORTER:  Understand.

This is a superb example of why the Democrats cringe whenever this woman appears on camera and why reporters like the one in this interview smirk and claim to be confused.   Waters claiming that Yates was fired because she was close to him in an investigation is almost too fun to use against her.  Yates was an acting Attorney General who decided to defy Trump’s executive action ban on travelers from certain countries.  That’s the reason she was fired.  Flynn was fired because he lied to the Vice President about having spoken to the Russian ambassador.  In neither case was there any investigation by these two individuals.

And even if there was an investigation and she’s actually intimating that they were somehow witnesses to some unholy evidence against the president, their firing wouldn’t preclude them from still being questioned in an ongoing investigation.

The ludicrousness of this woman’s statements is beyond the pale.  Comey’s firing would only have been acceptable in the eyes of the Democrats if he was fired BY a Democrat…OR…if Trump had fired him on Day One of his presidency?

I wonder what the Democrat response would have been had Trump actually fired Comey on Day One.  Do you believe for one moment that they would have been okay with that?

Yeah, me neither.