In 2013, there was only one Senator who voted against ousted FBI Director James Comey, and that was Rand Paul.

His concerns were certainly vindicated this week before Comey was fired by President Trump.

Senator Paul clearly stated that his objection was simple — Comey wouldn’t come clean about government spying on innocent citizens.

Now Democrats and the liberal media are claiming the firing was like Nixon trying to cover up Watergate by firing his Attorney General unless they ended the investigation.

The firing of Comey is about competence and maintaining the rule of law.

The Hill quoted Senator Paul noting that “Democrats should be thanking Trump for the firing.”

“During an appearance on “Fox & Friends,” Paul said “there’s a lot of hypocrisy” coming from Democrats who are outraged by Trump dismissing the FBI chief.

“Many of these Democrats, including [Sen.] Chuck Schumer [N.Y.], said they lost confidence in Comey a long time ago,” Paul told the hosts, invoking the Senate Democratic leader.

“Hillary Clinton’s been blaming Comey. They should be thanking President Trump for getting rid of Comey because he politicized something that may well have had something to do with Hillary Clinton’s loss,” Paul said, referring to the former Democratic presidential nominee.

Paul, who was the only senator to vote against Comey during his 2013 confirmation hearing, asserted Wednesday that there is “no evidence” linking Trump’s campaign to Russia during last year’s presidential election.

“Not only is there no evidence that the Trump administration or campaign was connected to Russia or committed any crime, no evidence at all of committing a crime, there’s not even an accusation that I know of what crime would have potentially been committed,” he said.

Democrats previously questioned Comey’s ability to lead the bureau after he sent a letter to lawmakers days before the November election that said the FBI discovered new emails potentially relevant to the probe into Clinton’s use of a private email server while serving as secretary of State. Democrats, including Clinton, have cited the letter as one of the reasons for her loss to Trump.

But calls for his resignation quieted following the election, with Democrats wary of who might replace him.”

Comey’s competence was called into question time and time again during his May 3, 2017 Senate hearing.

During Comey’s May 3rd appearance before the Senate Judiciary Committee, Comey testified that, “Somehow, [Huma Abedin’s] emails were being forwarded to Anthony Weiner, including classified information,” Comey said. Weiner’s “then-spouse Huma Abedin appears to have had a regular practice of forwarding emails to him for him to print out for her so she could deliver them to the Secretary of State.” [Emphasis ours.]

The reason that answer is puzzling, as you’re a very accomplished lawyer,” said Cruz, “and as you’re well aware, every first-year law student learns in criminal law that ignorance of the law is no excuse.”

Senator Ted Cruz then offered the following commentary on the FBI investigation of Huma Abedin and Hillary Clinton:

You described the reason why the case was closed against Ms. Abedin as that you could not determine she was aware her conduct was unlawful. … Any first-year law student learns in criminal law ignorance of the law is no excuse, and that mens rea does not require knowledge that conduct is unlawful.”

Cruz continued:

The governing statutes – 18 USC 793f and 18 USC 798a – have no requirement of a knowledge of unlawful [intent]…under the terms of that statute, the fact pattern you described in this hearing [of Abedin’s behavior] seems to fit that statute directly. In that, if I understood you correctly, you said Ms. Abedin forwarded hundreds or thousands of classified emails to her husband on a non-government, non-classified computer.

“How does that conduct not directly violate that statute?” Cruz asked.

Comey blundered through a claim that “for generations” FBI practice has been to require intent even if the law doesn’t call for it.

In other words, Comey was no longer acting as the chief of investigation, but instead started acting like the Attorney General, — they make the decisions to prosecute.

Cruz was incredulous:

On its face, anyone dealing with classified information should know that conduct is impermissible. And let me ask you, how would you handle an FBI Agent who forwarded thousands of classified emails to his or her spouse on a non-government computer?

In a response that should have made front page news, Comey insisted he was “highly confident they wouldn’t be prosecuted.”

What it shows is the complete corruption of the FBI and the establishment of two systems of justice – one for everyday criminals who have a general sense of right and wrong, and those elite members of society who are so morally corrupted and entitled that right and wrong do not apply to them.

Here is video of Sen. Cruz questioning Director Comey.