John McCain Could Have Skipped David Petraeus’s Benghazi Testimony

U.S. Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) speaks to the media prior to the debate between U.S. President Barack Obama and Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney at the Keith C. and Elaine Johnson Wold Performing Arts Center at Lynn University on October 22, 2012 in Boca Raton, Florida. The focus for the final presidential debate before Election Day on November 6 is foreign policy.
He's got this, guys. Photo: Joe Raedle/Getty Images

John McCain — who has been so eager to hear more details about the September 11 Benghazi attack that he missed Wednesday's Senate briefing on the matter because he was busy demanding more information about the Benghazi attack at a press conferencemanaged to get himself to Friday's closed-door meeting with former CIA Director David Petraeus, who said the agency never tried to deny that the incident had been the work of terrorists. So, what did McCain learn? Nothing that his infallible instincts hadn't told him already, he says.  Asked on Saturday if he had been made privy to any information that would alter his scathing critique of U.N. Ambassador Susan Rice and her early remarks about the Benghazi attack (which she initially attributed to anger over the Innocence of Muslims YouTube trailer), McCain answered, "No, because I knew it was a terrorist attack from the beginning. People don't go to spontaneous demonstrations with mortars and RPGs."

He also "brushed off a letter sent to him Friday by Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid in which Reid rejected McCain's call for a Senate select committee to investigate Benghazi and said it would be a 'venue for baseless partisan attacks.'" McCain said he intended to continue to push the issues, and claimed, "We're not seeing a confrontation with anyone. We're not trying to quote 'take on anyone.'" Somehow, we just don't believe him.