Rep. Maxine Waters (D-CA) is still on the warpath. She wants to impeach Trump, and has said that she will fight every day to make that happen. She has said he has no business being president (sorry, that’s how elections work). And she called the president a “disgusting, poor excuse of a man” at a recent EMILY’s List gala. This is one of the benefits of being a California Democrat. You can just be stark raving mad all the time, say insane things, and be shamelessly hypocritical with no political consequences. In January, Waters was visibly irate with then-FBI Director James Comey. Now that he’s out, you would think she’s overjoyed. Nope. She’s not because Trump fired Mr. Comey and not Hillary. It’s a level of hypocrisy that initially drew confusion from NBC’s Peter Alexander.

The reason for Water’s opposition is because it has to do with the probe into possible collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia. Waters says people need to focus on this connection, which has yet to yield any solid evidence of collusion from both the House and Senate Intelligence Committee investigations. Nevertheless, Waters feels confident that there’s going to be enough to impeach the president. Well, the investigation into such ties will continue, congresswoman. Here are some portions of the transcript, including the part where Waters says it would be okay for Hillary Clinton to fire Comey, but not Trump (via RCP):

PETER ALEXANDER: So, Congresswoman, respecting that be 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. MAXINE WATERS: No. But I believe the president thought that. Don't forget. You're talking about what some Democrats 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. ALEXANDER: But you said he had no credibility so it would make sense that he get rid of him. WATERS: 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. ALEXANDER: The bottom line is you think an FBI director without credibility would have been best served in this position to try to pursue this investigation. WATERS: I think that if the president would have fired him when he first came in, he would not have to be in a position now where he is trying to make up a story about why. It does not meet the smell test. ALEXANDER: 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 have fired him. Yes. ALEXANDER: So she should have fired him but had he shouldn't fire him. This is why I'm confused. WATERS: No, you're not confused. If the president is implicated in an investigation -- ALEXANDER: I am confused.

My God, we need to make this woman the face of the Democratic Party. The unhinged rants would have independent voters running for the hills. It’s just highly entertaining. Maybe she’ll even run for president. One can only hope for such a landslide re-election for Mr. Trump.