Maxine Waters Targets Trump, Promises to Go After Him Even If He Loses Election

Waters also went on NPR and gave an interview on the matter:

AILSA CHANG, HOST:

Today the Supreme Court issued its final decisions for this term. Among them are rulings in a group of cases that stem from state and congressional efforts to subpoena President Trump's financial records. The high court ordered the cases sent back to the lower courts, all but guaranteeing that Trump's financial records will not be released until after the election. In one of the rulings, Chief Justice John Roberts, writing for the 7-2 majority, affirmed Congress's right to subpoena information for the purpose of writing legislation. But he said that power is limited and cannot be used for law enforcement efforts. Democrat Maxine Waters is chair of the House Financial Services Committee, and she joins us now. Welcome.

MAXINE WATERS: Thank you. Delighted to be with you.

CHANG: We're delighted to have you. Now, your committee has subpoenaed financial records from two banks as part of an investigation into money laundering and possible foreign influence in President Trump's election. Tell me, how do you respond to today's decision?

WATERS: Well, I tell you, I would have loved to have had a decision in our favor that absolutely supported our right to subpoena Deutsche Bank for the records of the president. We did not get that. But I am very pleased that they reaffirmed our right to be able to ask for those documents that we subpoenaed. And so we didn't get them, we didn't get the decision that we wanted today. But it has been remanded to the lower courts, and so they have given us, as someone described, a roadmap and told us how the lower courts should review why we're asking for these documents. And that review will determine whether or not we will get a decision in our favor or not for the subpoena of those documents, yes.

CHANG: Now, one piece of guidance that the Supreme Court did issue was that Congress should narrow the scope of its demand for documents, which originally included financial records from the president, his family and his businesses. Do you think the justices have a point there, that Democrats simply cast too wide of a net?

WATERS: Well, I think they're being careful. I think they were interested in ensuring that it was not political, that it really did have a legislative purpose.

CHANG: I'm sorry. You're talking about the justices were trying to be careful or Democrats were trying to be careful?

WATERS: Oh, the justices...

CHANG: OK.

WATERS: ...Were trying to be careful. And as I, you know, recall, they did say that they wanted to ensure that it does have a legitimate legislative purpose and we were just not somehow using our power to, you know, get into the personal finances in order to try to embarrass, et cetera, et cetera. And so they made that decision. And that's a decision we live with. And we will continue. And we will follow the roadmap that they have given us because we think that we can absolutely show that it is a legitimate legislative purpose.

Waters was clearly lying through her teeth in the interview.

Trying to get Trump's financial information is completely political!

Take a look at what's circulating on Twitter:

It's not shocking to see someone like Waters playing games like this.

Fox News reported last month how Waters stated the tradition of police had to be "done away with":

Rep. Maxine Waters, D-Calif., said on Tuesday that the recent protests againt police brutality and racial injustice are about battling a “tradition” in law enforcement that has to be “done away with,” while also downplaying the violence and looting during some of the protests as “minor in relationship to the numbers who are on the positive side of this and talking about change.”

Waters, who was speaking during an interview on MSNBC’s “The Beat,” said the protests that followed the death of George Floyd, who died while in Minneapolis police custody, spurred a national debate over policing and reform measures within law enforcement.

“Without the kind of protests that we have seen, we would not have so many people saying: ‘Oh, my goodness, things have got to change.'” Waters said. “And that’s not simply black people, it’s white and all races taking to the streets and young people taking to the streets.”

She added: “No, this change and this talk of change would not be happening without the kind of protests that we have witnessed.”

The death of Floyd, a black man who died after a Minneapolis police officer knelt on his neck for almost nine minutes despite pleas that he was unable to breathe, and those of other African-Americans across the country by police sparked nationwide protests earlier this month.

The protests, which called for a major overhaul of police practices and for large cuts in law enforcement funding, were mostly peaceful – but there were instances in cities from New York to Los Angeles of widespread looting and property damage that led mayors to enforce curfews in a slew or urban areas nationwide.

Waters on Tuesday did not condone the looting and violence that occurred during some of the protests but called it “minor” compared to the number of people who came out to demonstrate, and argued that without protests there would be no moves by lawmakers or law enforcement officials to reform troubled police departments.

“Sometimes all of the attention is on the violence that sometimes is caused or some of the wreckage that’s caused by some of the protesters, but that is minor in relationship to the numbers who are on the positive side of this and talking about change,” she said.

Here's Waters' interview on MSNBC over her personal pursuit of the President: