Pastor Saeed Abedini and Three Other Americans Freed By Iran

A video of Jay Sekulow talking about some of the details of the release can be viewed here.

Pastor Saeed Abedini
before being imprisoned

American Pastor Saeed Abedini has just been released from imprisonment in Iran.

For more than three years, Pastor Saeed – a U.S. citizen – has endured imprisonment in Iran.

We can now officially confirm that Pastor Saeed has been freed. In addition there are reports that 3 other Americans imprisoned in Iran have also been released.

News broke late last night that Pastor Saeed had been taken from his prison cell to Iran’s Central Intelligence agency. While the details are still coming in, we can confirm that this morning he was released.

Along with Jay and millions of other Christians, I want to publicly thank God for answering our prayers and turning the hearts of the Iranian rulers.

I posted a Christmas letter from Pastor Abedini in 2014 which mentions some of his hardships in prison and his reflections on the first Christmas and its hardships for Mary and Joseph along with God's purpose in sending His only begotten Son into the world.

Christmas means that God came so that He would enter your hearts today and transform your lives and to replace your pain with indescribable joy.

Christmas is the manifestation of the radiant brightness of the Glory of God in the birth of a child named Emmanuel, which means God is with us.

Christmas is the day that the heat of the life-giving fire of God’s love shone in the dark cold wintry frozen hearts and burst forth in this deadly wicked world.

Ted Cruz Apologizes to New Yorkers (for what they have to endure)

The clear statements of Gov. Andrew Cuomo that conservatives are "right-to-life, pro-assault-weapon, anti-gay" and "have no place in the state of New York, because that's not who New Yorkers are" and Mayor Bill de Blasio's declaration that pro-life "does not represent the views of the people of New York" clearly show that New York's political leaders see a huge divide between New York values and conservative values. Here's what the editors of the New York Post had to say:

But the prize for the most blatantly hypocritical response goes jointly to Gov. Cuomo and Mayor de Blasio.

Both men on Friday demanded Cruz apologize to the people of New York — with Cuomo accusing him of “demonizing” those he disagrees with and polarizing voters so as to “make it impossible to govern.”

Besides, he argued, what Cruz said is “not even true about New York: We have a significant Conservative Party and movement,” and Cuomo has to “deal with them every day.”

Hah! Two years ago, Cuomo himself denounced conservatives as “right-to-life, pro-assault-weapon, anti-gay.”

“Extreme conservatives,” said the governor, “have no place in the state of New York, because that’s not who New Yorkers are.”

De Blasio was quick to say amen: “I agree with Gov. Cuomo’s remarks,” he said, adding that anyone who is pro-life “does not represent the views of the people of New York.”

That all sounds pretty much like what Ted Cruz was saying about “New York values” being at odds with conservative ones.

And declaring that people who think a certain way “have no place in the state of New York” sure sounds like rank “demonizing” to us. Not to mention that it goes way, way beyond anything Ted Cruz had to say.

Marco Rubio Was Not the Main Guy Behind Defunding Obamacare or Even an Important Player

In a post last month I passed on the word that Senator Marco Rubio was the key figure behind defunding Obamacare. Quoting the New York Times:

A little-noticed health care provision that Senator Marco Rubio of Florida slipped into a giant spending law last year has tangled up the Obama administration, sent tremors through health insurance markets and rattled confidence in the durability of President Obama’s signature health law.

Well, apparently they got it wrong. There's now a correction on the story:

Correction: January 15, 2016 An article on Dec. 10 about Marco Rubio’s efforts to undermine an element of the Affordable Care Act referred incorrectly to one element of the legislative history. While Mr. Rubio was the most prominent congressional opponent of the so-called risk corridor payments in the health law, and introduced measures to undermine them, other Republicans were ultimately responsible for inserting a provision into a 2014 spending bill that limited the payments. The error was repeated in a picture caption with the continuation of the article. [emphasis added]

Oops! The "other Republicans", unnamed by the Times, were "Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-Ala.), and Rep. Fred Upton (R-Mich.) and then-Rep. Jack Kingston (R-Ga.).  The Washington Post's Glenn Kessler:

But a House probe that year actually suggested claims would exceed payments. Meanwhile, Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-Ala.), then ranking member of the Budget Committee, and Rep. Fred Upton (R-Mich.), chairman of the Energy and Commerce Committee, came up with a new strategy of attacking the legality of the payments. They also enlisted the help of then-Rep. Jack Kingston (R-Ga.), who chaired the appropriations panel that funds the Department of Health and Human Services and the Labor Department.

The lawmakers questioned whether the payments were actually appropriated correctly — forcing the administration to make changes that ultimately allowed the lawmakers to checkmate the administration. In effect, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) was forced to admit that the ACA did not automatically appropriate the funds, but it was subject to discretion of Congress. (A Government Accountability Office opinion requested by Sessions and Upton backed up much of the GOP contention.)

So, these guys are the real heroes. And the New York Times again has egg on its face for poor reporting and not making corrections until almost four weeks after the story had been corrected by good reporting.

A Sept. 30, 2014, legal opinion from the congressional Government Accountability Office validated part of the Sessions-Upton strategy. The analysis confirmed that the president's health law failed to provide specific authority for the risk corridor payments.

But there was a nuance. Under risk corridors, insurers whose medical claims costs are lower than expected in a given year pay in money to help insurers whose costs are high. GAO said those were "user fees" and the administration could still pay insurers through other health care accounts endowed with broad spending authority.

Those accounts could also be used to shift additional funding in case insurer payments into the program were insufficient.

Along with Kingston, Sessions and Upton sprang the trap, crafting a one-sentence budget provision that blocked the administration from covering any shortfalls.

No comment on what this says about Senator Rubio's credibility.

H/T Byron York

David Brooks on Ted Cruz and the Haley Case Is Either "deliberately deceptive or recklessly ignorant"

David Brooks - December 2015

James Taranto in the Wall Street Journal dismantles David Brooks' vicious criticism of Senator Ted Cruz in a recent column.

David Brooks takes some below the belt swings at Senator Ted Cruz in the column calling Cruz the purveyor of "pagan brutalism" because "[t]here is not a hint of compassion, gentleness and mercy."

Brooks' Exhibit A is a legal case Cruz prosecuted against Michael Wayne Haley which made its way to the Supreme Court. Brooks quotes Justice Anthony Kennedy: “Is there some rule that you can’t confess error in your state?” But, Brooks uses his own "pagan brutalism" in leaving out important evidence that vindicates Cruz who prevailed in the decision of the nation's highest court. Taranto:

The vote was 6-3, with Kennedy among the dissenters. The majority opinion was written by Justice Sandra Day O’Connor and joined by, among others, Clinton appointees Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Stephen Breyer.

Justices Ginsburg, Breyer, Thomas, Souter,
Kennedy, O'Connor, Scalia, Stevens in 2005

If arguing against Haley’s legal position “reveals something interesting about Cruz’s character,” what does deciding against it reveal about the character of O’Connor, Ginsburg, Breyer and the others in the majority? 

Oh. Brooks conveniently leaves out that Ginsburg, Breyer and O'Connor have rarely been accused of "pagan brutalism" for their judicial opinions--except by David Brooks' own implication (not directly expressed because even New York Times readers would find it ludicrous).

Taranto says Brooks uses the Haley case, which does not deal with Haley's guilt or innocence but procedural matters, in a manner either "deliberately deceptive or recklessly ignorant". Brooks implies that Haley is innocent and was railroaded. But, the case hangs on a technicality. And the Supreme Court found that Haley would not be incarcerated while he pleaded his case on the technicality.

And because petitioner has assured us that it will not seek to reincarcerate respondent during the pendency of his ineffective assistance claim, Tr. of Oral Arg., at 52 ("[T]he state is willing to allow the ineffective assistance claim to be litigated before proceeding to reincarcerate [respondent]"), the negative consequences for respondent of our judgment to vacate and remand in this case are minimal.

Senator Ted Cruz 2016

Taranto ends his column with a notation that Brooks' use of this case does not bring into issue Ted Cruz's character.  It actually calls into question David Brooks' character.

Brooks means to denounce Cruz, not to vindicate Haley. Criticizing politicians, even denouncing them, is part of the job of an opinion columnist. But Brooks’s treatment of this case is either deliberately deceptive or recklessly ignorant. It may raise questions of character, but not Ted Cruz’s.

What a fall. Brooks goes from deciding if a candidate is presidential material by the crease of his pants to misrepresentation of a Supreme Court case and decision. Brooks was far superior morally as a fool than he is as false witness.

Update: Here's a more kindly view of David Brooks, who is trying to the kind of person people will feel comfortable confiding in--except Ted Cruz and the millions of Americans who want Cruz to be president.

Palin Spoofs Tina Fey

Interesting that she included Sen. Lindsey Graham in the joke, and he was willing.

Palin has fun with some of her own jokes (the Big Gulp) in connecting them to Tina Fey's trade mark "[c]haracters with embarrassing addictions to junk food".

Mainly it shows how Palin likes to have fun along with her serious side. Hillary Clinton would kill for this kind of ability to connect and be fun.

It reminds how the media goons have done everything they can to personally destroy Palin who is bright, talented and funny. The press in their group think are shameful, disgusting people who rightly deserve their low confidence rating among the American people. Only Congress rates lower (8%). TV news ties with Big Business (21%) and newspapers (24%) tie organized labor's low and barely edge above the criminal justice system (23%).

H/T Conservatives for Palin

Some Strange Moves by Pro-Bush PAC and Rubio

Governor Jeb Bush

Interesting that the pro-Jeb Bush Right to Rise PAC accuses Donald Trump of trying to insult his way to the presidency, but shows Bush on his way to the presidency insulting Trump.

"And he gets his foreign policy experience from 'the shows'. . . . I don't know if that's Saturday morning or Sunday morning. Donald, you're not going to be insult your way to the presidency."

Then Marco Rubio says in attacking Ted Cruz that if ISIS had lobbyists they would have spent millions to pass the "anti-intelligence law" which Cruz voted for.

Senator Marco Rubio

"If ISIS had lobbyists in Washington, they would have spent millions to support the anti-intelligence law that was just passed with the help of some Republicans now running for president," Rubio said in foreign policy speech delivered Monday in Hooksett, New Hampshire.

The "anti-intelligence law" to which Rubio referred is the USA Freedom Act, passed in June 2015. It restricts the National Security Agency's collection of so-called metadata from Americans' phone records, a controversial part of the nation's post-9/11 anti-terrorist strategy. Rubio has said the Freedom Act "weakens U.S. national security by outlawing the very programs our intelligence community and the FBI have used to protect us time and time again."

Rubio's presidential site touting Trey Gowdy

But, as Byron York notes, lots of Republicans voted for that bill including Rep. Trey Gowdy who just endorsed Rubio and who Rubio is having speak at his campaign events. Are they all unwitting ISIS supporters?

Beyond going wildly over the top, has Rubio looked at who else voted for the USA Freedom Act? There are a lot of Republicans — conservatives whose support Rubio will need in this campaign — who acted, in Rubio's telling, in concert with those imaginary ISIS lobbyists. 

The bill passed by a vote of 67 to 32 in the Senate and 338 to 88 in the House.

 Sometimes political shots are not well aimed--even aimed at the candidate's own foot.

IRS Finally Makes 2015 Form 1040 Available, But No Instructions

only 1040 instructions available today

The IRS shows incompetence on top of political skullduggery. 

Between 2010 and 2012 the IRS targeted conservative groups for "extra scrutiny" simply because they had conservative sounding words in their names.

During that period, about 75 groups were selected for extra inquiry — including burdensome questionnaires and, in some cases, improper requests for the names of their donors — simply because of the words in their names, [Lois Lerner] said in a conference call with reporters.

They constituted about one-quarter of the 300 groups who were flagged for additional analysis by employees of the IRS tax-exempt unit’s main office in Cincinnati.

The actual number of conservative groups targeted was north of 290.

Now the agency can't even get its major form instructions online in the year it has to be filed.

Form 1040 was finally posted two days before the end of 2015--December 29, 2015. But still no instructions. This is probably due to new Obamacare requirements.

This all makes tax reforms that would eliminate the need for the IRS much more attractive.