As many of you are noting that is strange behavior.
Unless you remember that they were never kidnapped.
No, I'm not saying they weren't kidnapped.
Or implying this was some kind of hoax.
I am noting that useless Haider al-Abadi (the latest man the US government has put in charge of Iraq) had nothing to say about the three Americans until the kidnappings were linked (by speculation) to the government of Iran.
At which point, Haider had to come out and defend his bride and was ranting that Iran had nothing to do with it and, you know what, he didn't even know that a kidnapping had taken place and . . .
So that may be part of it.
The US government may be hampered in how much they can celebrate (and use this good news) by the fact that the prime minister of Iraq has insisted that the three probably weren't even kidnapped.
Equally true, if Iran was involved, the White House has been way too close to Tehran and it really doesn't reflect well on them if indeed Iran was linked to the kidnappings.
At the State Dept yesterday, the press pushed back and even pointed out that Secretary of State John Kerry had recently raised the issue with the government of Iran.
Even so, spokesperson Mark Toner refused to address the issue.
And a State Dept spokesperson?
When three Americans overseas are kidnapped and held for over a month and then released?
That's a White House announcement.
That's a time-for-remarks-from-the-President moment.
The silence on this is raising all sorts of questions that would vanish immediately if the news was treated as it normally would be.
And, no, the lack of individual Privacy Waivers from the three does not prevent the State Dept or White House from commenting on who kidnapped the three. It may (or may not) prevent them from announcing the names of the three, it does not prevent State or the White House from discussing the actual events.
Mike's "Editorial: Something Better Than Kagan" is up and the following community sites also posted:
The e-mail address for this site is email@example.com.