Senator John McCain drew attention, confusion, and concern, with his line of questioning during former FBI Director James Comey’s testimony before the Senate Intelligence Committee,  according to reports.

80-year-old McCain, told Comey he believed there was a “double standard”, because on one hand one investigation into the use of a private email server by Hillary Clinton, ended in July, while the one into Russian interference in the 2016 presidential campaign continues.

He said, “It’s hard to reconcile: In one case you reach a complete conclusion and the other side you have not”. He also added: “She’s one of the candidates, but in her case, you say there will be no charges, and in the case of President Trump, the investigation continues.” Comey, still FBI Director then, recommended no criminal charges for Hillary Clinton for the way she handled classified information as the Secretary of State, New York Times reports.

[See Also] “We’re under siege” | President Trump gives charging speech during Comey’s testimony

The Hillary mail investigation was in no way connected to the Russian investigation but the aging Senator for some reason connected the two. McCain said: “I don’t quite understand how you could be done with that, but not done with the whole investigation of their attempt to affect the outcome of our election.”

A confused Comey responded “I’m a little confused, Senator,” then went on to clarify there were two separate investigations, but this did not stop McCain.

McCain’s office has since issued a statement about what cold have wrong during the hearing. “I get the sense from Twitter that my line of questioning today went over people’s heads,” the senator said. “Maybe going forward I shouldn’t stay up late watching the Diamondbacks night games”. The rest of the statement reads;

[In case you missed it]

“What I was trying to get at was whether Mr. Comey believes that any of his interactions with the President rise to the level of obstruction of justice. In the case of Secretary Clinton’s emails, Mr. Comey was willing to step beyond his role as an investigator and state his belief about what ‘no reasonable prosecutor’ would conclude about the evidence. I wanted Mr. Comey to apply the same approach to the key question surrounding his interactions with President Trump — whether or not the President’s conduct constitutes obstruction of justice. While I missed an opportunity in today’s hearing, I still believe this question is important, and I intend to submit it in writing to Mr. Comey for the record.”