Watch: MSNBC host challenges Maxine Waters’ contradictory statements on Comey
MSNBC anchor Peter Alexander took Rep. Maxine Waters (D-Ca.) to task over her past statement about FBI Director James Comey and how they didn’t quite fit with her current stance of outrage after his firing at the hands of President Trump. The interview was conducted Wednesday.
“You obviously have been very critical of James Comey in the past,” Alexander asked, “you said that he had ‘no credibility,’ I assume you support the president’s decision then, to fire his FBI director.”
“No, I do not, necessarily,” Waters answered, “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 said he had confidence in him, if the president had not said he was a part of his team, then…”
“But Congresswoman,” Alexander interrupted, “I understand that in the past 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, made the decision to get rid of him?”
“Oh no, no no no no no no,” she exclaimed, “No, not necessarily, and let me tell you why. 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 that there’s enough there that we know about the Kremlin and about Putin to be concerned about whether or not there was collusion.”
“And I believe that they should have to connect the dots and get the facts because I believe that it will lead to the impeachment of this president,” she concluded.
“So Congresswoman, respecting that,” he continued to inquire, “to be clear, you believe it would have 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.”
“No, but I believe the president thought that,” she responded. “Don’t forget, you’re talking about what some Democrat said, what I said, but don’t forget, he was the president. The president supported him, he had confidence in him, it was within his power.”
“But you said he had no credibility,” he interrupted, “so it would seem to make sense to get rid of him.”
“I did, absolutely,” Waters responded, “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.”
“The bottom line is that you think an FBI director without credibility would have been best served in this position to try to pursue this investigation,” Alexander asked.
“They bottom line is,” she replied, “I think if the president had fired him when he first came in, he would not have to be in a position now where he’s trying to make up a story about why, it does not meet the smell test.”
“Understood,” he said. “So if Hillary Clinton had won the White House would you have recommended that she fire FBI Director James Comey?”
“Well let me tell you something,” Waters responded. “If she had won the White House, I believe that given what he did to her, and what he tried to do, she should have fired him, yes!”
“So she should have fired him but he shouldn’t have fired him?” he asked. “This is why I’m confused.”
“No, no you’re not confused,” she claimed.
“I am confused,” he responded.
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment