Supplemental: Did Matthews claim to be one of “us?”

THURSDAY, JULY 3, 2014

The press corps’ marketing scam: Let’s give credit where credit is due!

On Monday, June 23, the Post’s Philip Rucker authored a lengthy front-page report about Hillary Clinton’s troubling gaffes. Her troubling gaffes concerned her wealth, which is also troubling.

The 1800-word poison pen piece ran beneath this headline: “Clinton's rareļ¬ed life could be a liability in campaign.” Since then, the cub reporter has been pouring it on, delivering Ole Massa’s narrative.

Let’s give credit where credit is due! That very night, Chris Matthews was able to see, and willing to say, that something seemed to be somewhat odd about Rucker’s front-page report. After detailing some of the poison, Matthews said this to Nia-Malika Henderson:
MATTHEWS (6/23/14): Ryan Grim is Washington bureau chief for the Huffington Post and Nia-Malika Henderson is the national political reporter with the Washington Post.

Nia, I was looking at the New York Times—I mean, the Washington Post, your paper, this morning. I picked it up. I couldn’t believe this headline about “Some Democrats worry that Clinton’s wealth and imperial, whatever, image could be a problem for 2016.” That’s a strong statement to put on the front page of the newspaper. What do you make of it?
Already, Matthews was hedging. From that, and from his earlier comments, it wasn’t clear if he was surprised at the Washington Post or at the Democratic aides, most of whom went unnamed, who criticized Clinton in the report, sometimes with startling venom.

Do the unnamed aides really exist? We have no idea. But Henderson knew how to answer.

Henderson works for the Post—and from MSNBC. For these reasons, she said the newspaper’s conduct had been reasonable—and she acted like the attacks on Clinton had come from the GOP:
HENDERSON (continuing directly): It is. And it’s very timely because here we have had Hillary Clinton over these past couple of days rolling out her book tour, making—now this is the second major gaffe around wealth. She just hasn’t really figured out—even after several tries—hasn’t figured out a way to talk about her wealth.

And we know that Democrats are in a position, and even Republicans, too, where populism is all the rage. There is a lot of concern and talk on the progressive side about income equality. So it’s reasonable, I think, to put this question to Hillary Clinton and figure out if her wealth is going to be a problem for the Democratic Party.

Now, if we flash back to 2004, you remember, John Kerry, he also had something of a problem with his wealth. He was worth something like, what, $200 million because his wife was very wealthy. And you saw from Republicans, their attempts to paint him as French, as a wind-surfing flip-flopper.

And you see them early on trying to the cast Hillary Clinton in a similar way.
Nice play! In fact, the poison in the Post report had come from two principal sources—it had come from unnamed Obama aides (real or imagined) and from the Post itself.

Whatever! Matthews threw to Ryan Grim, but only after citing some shaky old tales from past White House campaigns. Grim seemed to see the actual source of the problem, but he didn’t want to judge:
MATTHEWS (continuing directly): Ryan, this is what we do in politics. You always try to make the other side kind of la-de-dah.

This was done against George Sr. Everybody loves George Sr. now, George Bush Sr. He was— Remember, he said, do you want some coffee? He said, “I will have just a splash.” And people ridiculed him for that. It was so country club.

(LAUGHTER)

And he also went to that supermarket. He didn’t know what a modern-day scanner looked like. He ordered some sweat socks. Everything was turned into another example of how he was the late George Apley or somebody, some Yankee who didn’t know what life was like.

So this isn’t just Hillary. But it is awful early to be nailing her this quickly. My thoughts, but what are yours?

GRIM: Right. And once this narrative is set—and once it was set with Bush Sr., the press kept going for it. So, she runs the risk of the press keep coming back to her over and over again on this. And she should probably just stay away from personal narrative here and just stick to inequality policy issues, because it just doesn’t work for her...
To his credit, Matthews seemed to see there was something odd about the early onset of this press corps illness. First, though, he repeated some hoary old tales from past campaigns, tales which may be bogus.

Did Bush 41 actually ask for “a splash of coffee?” That seems to be one of about 300 shaky “quotations” Maureen Dowd has invented at various times to clarify White House campaigns. Nor is it clear that Bush was ever mystified by that supermarket scanner, though pundits never stop repeating such tales once they’ve been memorized.

Grim at least seemed to realize that it’s really the press corps which seizes on these “narratives” and never lets them go. That said, he seemed to treat this low-IQ conduct as an immutable fact of life. Rather than criticize the corps, he said Clinton would have to learn how to answer these questions.

Clinton will have to learn how to answer these questions. (It’s amazingly easy to do so.) That said, we were very much struck by the place Matthews went next.

Eventually, Matthews began to act like it’s really the voters’ fault that these silly themes develop. In the process, he seemed to say that he himself is one of “us”—that he’s not like the wealthy Clintons.

We recommend that you watch the tape of what comes next.
To our ear, Matthews plainly ends up saying that he’s one of “us” when it comes to the question of wealth:
MATTHEWS: I wonder, Ryan—and I want to get back to Nia on this. But this is basic to our democracy:

Why do people want to be fooled? If they notice that a person is better off than they are and they’re making $200,000 a speech, and they obviously are accumulating some wealth and they have these fabulous degrees like Yale Law behind them and they are able to make this money and be very smart, elected to the Senate from New York, become secretary of state, this amazing success in life, why do they go, why do the people expect them to act like that didn’t happen?

She really didn’t– “Don’t act like you went to Yale Law School! Don’t act like you’re a Rhodes Scholar! Don’t like act you were a senator! Don’t like act you were secretary of state! Pretend you’re like us.”

And then you know it’s a fraud! But why do people want to be victims of fraud? Why do they want them to be like Prince Charles over with New Guineans dancing with them in their native gowns? Why do they want politicians to be frauds? Why don’t we accept them as they are and stop making them like us?

Because I don’t know the answer why we want them to be frauds to us. If she’s a little elitist, let her be a little elitist.
Just for the record, Matthews is extremely wealthy, apparently with the filthy lucre he gained from a deal with the devil.

Reportedly, Matthews’ salary went to $5 million in the year 2001. Beyond that, his wife, Kathleen Matthews, holds an upper-end corporate job with Marriott.

Chris Matthews is very wealthy. His summer home, the crib on Nantucket, was purchased in 2004 for $4.4 million—about the price of the Clintons’ two houses combined.

But with these facts, a problem arises. The upper-end “press corps” works very hard to keep us rubes from knowing or thinking about their vast wealth. They want us to think they’re ”just like us,” even as they sell their souls to their corporate owners, as Matthews apparently did with Jack Welch.

The jihad about the Clintons’ wealth turns on this endless scam. Horrible people like Diane Sawyer labor to make themselves seem like “one of us.”

Apparently, these efforts are quite successful. For this reason, multimillionaires are able to go on TV and feign concern about the Clintons’ worrisome wealth. No one seems to notice the oddness of this dance.

Go ahead—watch the tape of Matthews saying that “we” should “accept them as they are and stop making them like us.” Watch him go on to say this:

“I don’t know the answer why we want them to be frauds to us.”

Matthews is very wealthy, as the Clintons are. But even as he defended Hillary Clinton this night (after a decade of gender-laden Hillary-hating), he still seemed to feel that he had to pretend that he isn’t wealthy like them.

This is a remarkable marketing ploy, one the corps has worked for decades. Here’s why we offer these thoughts:

We still want to show you the tag team stylings of Hoover and Hostin, Erin Burnett’s vaudeville team in the matter of Clinton’s wealth.

We thought Hostin really worked it last week. She kept pretending she’s just like us, if not a little bit more so. Burnett was working it too, acting like one of us as opposed to the wealthy Clintons.

Sorry—we weren’t buying the play. Matthews’ claim to be one of “us” offers a bit of background.

Still coming: Hoover and Hostin, with Erin Burnett (reported net worth, $12 million)

55 comments:

  1. "Clinton will have to learn how to answer these questions. (It’s amazingly easy to do so.)"

    After this long trip through Anthropology land, starting back on June 23rd, Bob must have swallowed some oleaginous elixir to enable him to
    reluctantly squeeze out that turd of truth.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. "Clinton will have to learn how to answer these questions."

      Ya think?

      Bill seems to get it, as he told David Gregory:

      “You need to show by their policies and their statements about current conditions, how candidates of both parties feel about the central challenge of our time, which is the demise of the American dream and the loss of our leadership as the most successful middle-class country in the world.

      “I think I had the lowest net worth of any American president in the 20th century, when I took office. But now we've got a good life and I'm grateful for it. But we still go to our local grocery store at the weekend, we talk to people in our town, we know what's going on.

      “The real issue is, if you've been fortunate enough to be successful, are you now out of touch and insensitive to the agonising struggles other people are facing. That's the real issue.”

      Delete
    2. Someone cannot be a bona fide member of all segments of society at once. It takes effort to understand people whose lives are different. I saw Hillary Clinton make such an effort when she drove around the entire state of New York, urban and rural,visiting and talking with and listening to her prospective constituents prior to running for the senate. I would bet she is both talking and listening to a variety of people on her book tour, because that is what she does.

      Delete
    3. I wonder what "little person" planted the "we were broke" line in her head?

      Delete
  2. As with most of Bob's multipart series, this one could've been summed up in a few crisp paragraphs.

    ReplyDelete


  3. Dr.Brave Help Me To Stop A Divorce And Save My Marriage Today?

    Hello to every one out here, am here to share the unexpected miracle that happened to me three days ago, My name is Jeffrey Dowling,i live in TEXAS,USA.and I`m happily married to a lovely and caring wife,with two kids A very big problem occurred in my family seven months ago,between me and my wife so terrible that she took the case to court for a divorce she said that she never wanted to stay with me again,and that she did not love me anymore So she packed out of my house and made me and my children passed through severe pain. I tried all my possible means to get her back,after much begging,but all to no avail and she confirmed it that she has made her decision,and she never wanted to see me again. So on one evening,as i was coming back from work,i met an old friend of mine who asked of my wife So i explained every thing to her,so she told me that the only way i can get my wife back,is to visit a spell caster,because it has really worked for her too So i never believed in spell,but i had no other choice,than to follow her advice. Then she gave me the email address of the spell caster whom she visited.(bravespellcaster@gmail.com}, So the next morning,i sent a mail to the address she gave to me,and the spell caster assured me that i will get my wife back the next day what an amazing statement!! I never believed,so he spoke with me,and told me everything that i need to do. Then the next morning, So surprisingly, my wife who did not call me for the past seven {7}months,gave me a call to inform me that she was coming back So Amazing!! So that was how she came back that same day,with lots of love and joy,and she apologized for her mistake,and for the pain she caused me and my children. Then from that day,our relationship was now stronger than how it were before,by the help of a spell caster . So, was now stronger than how it were before,by the help of a spell caster . So, i will advice you out there to kindly visit the same website http://bravespellcaster.yolasite.com,if you are in any condition like this,or you have any problem related to "bringing your ex back. So thanks to Dr Brave for bringing back my wife,and brought great joy to my family once again.{bravespellcaster@gmail.com} , Thanks.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Well put, deadrat!

      Delete
    2. Get your own damn shtick.

      Delete
    3. Please folks, allow deadrat exclusive rights to repeat his joke attributing the spellcasters to KZ. Otherwise he won't complain anymore when somebody repeats the "care about black kids" joke. And then where would we all be?

      Delete
  4. OMB (Shuckin and Jivin with the OTB)

    Yessuh. The Top Speak Chucker for Ole Massa be jest a cub.

    Of course when perusing the archives for several previous references to Mr. Rucker we learned his previous scorn heaped by BOB did not merit mention of his tender age, inexperience, collegiate ties or Southern birthplace.

    Defending the poor downtrodden Clintons (and their often distancing and grimacing political cousin Al) requires BOB to give special attention to necessary detail.

    KZ

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Isn't it amazing?

      When it comes to Tea Partiers who demand that the President of the United States surrender with his hands in the air while they wave Confederate battle flags in front of the White House, we are told to love our enemies, just like King, Mandela and Malala.

      When it comes to people Somerby despises -- especially those who are younger and more successful -- then we go straight for the ad hominem.

      Delete
    2. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cubby_O'Brien

      Delete
    3. Glad you brought up the topic, AnonymousJuly 4, 2014 at 11:03 AM. Yes, the criticism of Hillary's wealth is unfair, but it's not nearly as poisonous as the myth that the Tea Parties are racist.

      Delete
    4. FYI: Nia-Malika Henderson is a Yalie too with an undergraduate degree from some southern college in Anthropology. She ain't a cub. Might be a mama grizzly though for defending the cub and their home cave.

      Delete
    5. Tea party racist? Stupid, gullible, and full of shit are way more common traits
      Berto

      Delete
    6. > Isn't it amazing?

      When it comes to Tea Partiers who demand that the President of the United States surrender with his hands in the air while they wave Confederate battle flags in front of the White House, we are told to love our enemies, just like King, Mandela and Malala.

      When it comes to people Somerby despises -- especially those who are younger and more successful -- then we go straight for the ad hominem.

      It's amazing that you're still too stupid to get it. The overall point isn't so much to love your enemies, though that's what King preached. The point is, it's not very productive, politically, to just brand your enemies as a bunch of racist and cut off any attempt to come to a common understanding.

      I know I'm trying to teach a dog calculus here, but whatever.

      Delete
  5. I'm confused. Is being rich in itself an evil (Chris Matthews, Rachel, Dowd, and so forth, on the "press" side; ), or is it only an evil if you don't take advantage of your wealthy platform to advocate for change in the system that got you where you are (in bs's theory, Clinton, Gore, maybe even Bush Sr -- hey, let's throw in T and FD R).

    There are some good observations and hints of good questions here, I think, but the ground of argumentation shifts so quickly and so often, that I remain lost.

    ReplyDelete
  6. For journalists, having undisclosed vested interests that bias reporting is a sin.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. http://www.bible.ca/psychiatry/psychiatry-mental-illness-bible-sin-guilt-conscience-cognitive-dissonance.htm

      Delete
  7. Typical Somerby post.

    Matthews offered a pretty ringing defense of Hillary, in that she has nothing to apologize for in regards to her success, nor does her success necessarily mean that she is "out of touch."

    Bob parses one sentence out of that -- "Why don’t we accept them as they are and stop making them like us?" -- and uses that to build another rant about the money Matthews makes. As if he needs to apologize for being successful.



    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. He almost got somebody killed.

      Delete
    2. When someone writes a whole page of truthful statements and one whopping lie, is it churlish to focus on the lie when all else was true? Obviously the lie must be addressed.

      Delete
    3. What is the lie here, use of the plural we?

      Delete
    4. As Bob often says, WE the people are dumb! Surely he includes himself and Matthews along with the rest of us rubes.

      Delete
    5. Is it wise to let pundits like Matthews pretend to be one of us while selling his ideas of how things work? It would be better if he made it plain that he makes a lot of money. He could say, "I make more money in a month than Hillary does in a year, so does that disqualify me from caring about people?" That could shift the argument to the real issue of the policies rather than the income.

      Delete
  8. To his credit, Matthews seemed to see there was something odd about the early onset of this press corps illness.

    I'm not sure that's to his credit. He likely also recognized something odd about the Clinton-Gore coverage he engaged in himself, but those $4.4 summer homes aren't going to pay for themselves.

    ReplyDelete
  9. The average voter doesn't really regard wealth in a candidate as a bad thing - lots of rich people have been elected President, whether their wealth was hereditary or made by themselves. It was certainly not Mitt's wealth which lost him the 2012 election. What may have harmed him was the open contempt for others in the 47% speech. His policies were generally openly plutocratic. Most people seem to think that aristocracy is a good thing - at least they obviously favor people related to those who have been in power before.

    Wealth is something that people like to read about or see on TV, so it's not surprising that the media recur to it.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Somerby sure refers to it a lot.

      Delete
    2. I believe that Bob's point is not wealth itself, but the distinct possibility that journalists are willing to report whatever they are told to report, if you offer them enough money. At which point they cease to be journalists and become part of a fraud on the public.

      Delete
  10. Who's complaining? Not me. The "care about black kids" joke never gets old.

    In fact, I'm chuckling at it right now. And you don' t see me making this joke, no matter how hilarious.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. That said, deadrat. THAT said. Us appreciate you. Your results may dither.

      Delete
    2. Hoary jokes never get old. Just oily and oleaginous. Like coots.

      Delete
    3. Anonymous @2:27P, I trust it's obvious that I live for your approbation.

      Anonymous @3:27P, Coots don't necessarily get oleaginous. I should know.

      Delete
    4. I guess it just happens to rich ones who are Republican and female?

      Delete
  11. Can anybody explain how Nia-Malika Henderson "acted like the attacks on Clinton had come from the GOP"?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. <quote emphasis="mine">
      And you saw from Republicans, their attempts to paint him [Kerry] as French, as a wind-surfing flip-flopper.

      And you see them early on trying to the cast Hillary Clinton in a similar way.
      </quote>

      Delete
    2. Is that "acting like" or stating a fact that "you see them early on trying to cast"?

      Delete
    3. Anonymous @4:06, Sorry, I'm missing your point. It's not a fact that Republicans are trying to cast Hillary Clinton as too rich. (Why would they do that? Republicans see wealth as evidence of virtue.) It was unnamed supposed sources who were supposedly Obama aides. And it was WaPo itself.

      Delete
    4. Sorry. I've been away.

      The reference to what the Republicans are doing to Hillary seems a reference back to what was done to Kerry. I see that as an effort by Henderson to change the subject from the question Matthews posed, which she had already partially answered. She was saying it was legitimate for Democrats to wonder if Hillary could be attacked along the lines that Kerry was attacked and thus a legitimate line of inquiry for the post.

      And indeed, before the Post began its series, the Republicans had already launched their line of attack, based not on Hillary's wealth, but her attempt to portray herself as poor.

      Witness Rush the morning after the interview with Sawyer:

      http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/daily/2014/06/10/mrs_clinton_s_dead_broke_sob_story

      Mind you I am not defending the Post, but doubting if Somerby's on the right track with his take on what Henderson was trying to say.

      Delete
  12. Crescent the ClownJuly 4, 2014 at 3:49 PM

    Anthropology

    Clown car

    https://uglicoyote.files.wordpress.com/2011/12/clown-car.png

    Jihad

    http://www.jihadwatch.org/WP001/wp-content/uploads/Aftermath-of-a-car-bomb-i-016.jpg

    ReplyDelete
  13. http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2014/07/hillary-clinton-says-shes-donated-all-university-speaking-fees/

    Hillary Clinton continued to justify her high-dollar speaking fees on Friday, telling ABC News’ Ann Compton that all of the money she’s made from colleges over the past year and a half has been donated to her family’s foundation.

    “All of the fees have been donated to the Clinton Foundation for it to continue its life-changing and life-saving work. So it goes from a foundation at a university to another foundation,” Clinton said when asked about the criticism she and her husband have faced recently for their wealth.


    This statement leaves various questions, for those with suspicious minds:

    1. Did Hillary originally plan to keep some of the fees? That is, did she decide after the fact to donate all the speaking fees to the Clinton Foundation because of the fuss being raised?

    2. Does Hillary gain anything from the Clinton Foundation?

    3. It's common for Presidential candidates to give a series of speeches at colleges, but I don't recall these past candidates (or their designated charities) being paid -- certainly not hundreds of thousands of dollars per speech. Why is Hillary asking for so much money?

    4. Why are the universities ponying up so much money? After all, the speeches probably do more for Clinton's candidacy and her book sales than they do for the college students.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. As a Republican I have to ask. Why do the answers to any of those questions matter? They matter to a large subset of Democrats who resent and envy others who are more successful. You could scrutinize the decisions of the universities, but that has nothing to do with the propriety of Clinton's actions.

      Delete
  14. Dave, it's like free enterprise. Hillary asks for as much as she wants. The colleges offer what they're willing to spend. If they reach agreement, she speaks. If not, not.

    ReplyDelete
  15. Read her book! Clinton is out of touch, but I doubt the press are going to tell you how: she believes Americans were fearful of universal healthcare in the 90's when in fact a majority supported it and continue to support it. She's just another corporate Democrat like Obama who buys into the press-corp myths.

    ReplyDelete
  16. Law Professor Ann Althouse's reaction is similar to mine:

    I'm irritated at Hillary and outraged at the new media outlets who put the headline in that form, which is missing the fact that flips the story: Hillary Clinton donates the money to her own foundation....

    What is her salary from the foundation? How much of her expenses are covered by family foundation money? How many members of her family make salaries from that foundation? To what extent is the foundation an income tax dodge? And didn't Hillary Clinton recently portray herself as not truly rich because she and Bill pay income tax on their money?

    Taking from your foundation and putting it in my foundation... what a lovely, arrogant metaphor for a liberal's view of government! I can spend your money better than you can. The universities have money that they might spend to improve education for their students and to advance scholarship, but it could be shifted into the Clinton Foundation which does whatever it does, some charitable things that maintain and advance the Clintons' political fortunes.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. And here's my reaction to Althouse's and your reaction: you're a matched pair of ignorant hypocrites, breathtaking in the depth of your ignorance and the breadth of your hypocrisy.

      The ignorance first. What's Clinton's salary from the foundation? None. How much of her expenses are covered by the foundation? None. How many members of her family make salaries from that foundation? None. (Chelsea is an uncompensated director.) To what extent is the foundation an income tax dodge? To the same extent that any charitable organization is a tax dodge. All of these answers is readily available because the Form 990 for the Clinton Foundation is online. But Althouse and you would rather ask rhetorical questions -- you certainly don't expect answers -- to pump up your faux outrage.

      Now to the hypocrisy. Did either of you object to Romney contributing to the Mormon Church? Is funding Mormon missionaries to nail lifts to the natives' feet or paying to baptize Holocaust survivors in the LDS your idea of tax-deductible charity? I guess so, since neither of you complained about it. Clinton is a piker in the wealth department compared to Romney who used so many tax dodges, including off-shore accounts, that he was afraid to release his tax returns for the time he was holding or running for public office. Here's Althouse's "outrage" about that:

      <quote>
      [W]hat's wrong with a candidate being wealthy? Candidates for President are men and women in the later stages of their careers. They are presenting themselves as highly competent and knowledgeable about economic matters. If they're not rich, why should we trust them managing our prosperity?
      </quote>

      Delete
  17. deadrat, your mention of the Mormon Church suggests the following analogy: How would you have felt if universities (many of them public) were paying hundreds of thousands to the Mormon Church for a Romney speech?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Before I answer your question about speaking fees, may I assume that you're copping to the charges of abyssal ignorance and breathtaking hypocrisy in the matter of the Clintons' foundation?

      Delete
    2. Yes, I am ignorant of the inner workings of the Clinton Foundation. I think Ann Althouse admitted her ignorance in her post. That's the point. Huge amounts of money go in and out of that organization every year. It's controlled by people close to the Clinton's. And, we're all ignorant of the Foundation's inner workings.

      There's something weird about these enormous payments. Last month I attended a speech at Wellesley College given by Madeleine Albright, another former Secretary of State. Coincidentally, Hillary Clinton was also present. (Hillary is class of '69; Madeleine is class of '59.) I don't think Madeleine got hundreds of thousands of dollars for that speech.

      Delete
    3. OK, good. Now, why are you ignorant of the inner workings of the Clinton Foundation? The Foundation's audit and its tax returns are all online. So, no, we're not all ignorant of the Foundation's workings. You and Althouse, sure. But not everyone.

      I'm willing to believe that there's something wrong with Clinton's speaking fees. Just like I'm willing to believe there's something wrong in all those tax returns that Willard refused to release. But I'm sure not going to take the word of willful ignoramuses and egregious hypocrites.

      Delete
    4. "But I'm sure not going to take the word of willful ignoramuses and egregious hypocrites."

      And that's the full credit answer to the question: Why is deadrat so loathed by TDH trolls from Cali to KalamaZoo?

      Delete
    5. It's OK with me if Mitt donates his speaking fee to his Church.

      Delete
    6. It is OK with me if those donations defer the cost of baptizing the dead.

      Delete
    7. David in Ca provides a nice example here on why the Conservative can never be taken seriously. His exist from the thread speaks volumes.

      Delete


  18. How (Dr.Brave) Help Me To Stop A Divorce And Save My Marriage Today?

    My name is Mark Davis, my family and i live in UK.It was after seven years i got to discover that my wife was unfaithful to me.I didn't know what was going on at first but as she got deep in the affair with her new lover, i felt that our marriage was on the rocks.I notice that she no longer light up when i touch her or kiss her in her neck and her chest cos she really liked it when i did that, she also usually get naked in front of me but when she started seeing that guy she stopped it.I remember asking her if i have done anything that makes her feel irritated when i am around her then she gives silly excuses that she has been feeling stressed up and that she need space for a while.I know when you are been asked for space its usually because there is something fishy is going on.I hired a private investigator to help find out what was going on.And in a week time he brought me prove that my wife that i have lived with for seven straight year is cheating on me with her high school lover.I had picture of her walking out a of a restaurant with him and many other photo of them kissing in public like she will never be caught by someone that knows she is my wife.I asked myself, even when we had a daughter together she could this to me.That same night i showed her the pictures that i got from my private investigator.She didn't look at it before saying, that she is seeing someone and she know that i just found out about it.Then she said that she is in love with him.At that moment, i didn't know if to kill myself or to kill her but the button line is that if i was going to kill anyone it was going to be me cos i was so much in love with her to even think of thinking to hurt her.As time when on she asked for a divorce and got it and even got custody of our daughter and i was all alone by myself.For a year i tried all i could to get her back with the help of my seven year old daughter.Even at that all effect was in vain, i used the help of her friend but turned out all bad.I know most people don't believe in spell casting but believe me this was my last option and the result i most say was impressive.And i know it difficult to believe but A SPELL CASTER Dr brave really made my life much better cos he gave me my family back.He didn't ask me to pay for what he did for me all i was to do, was to provide the materials for the spell and believe that he had the power to help me.Like he said, he was going to do something that will make her reset her love and affection for me just as it has always been.My wife told me she woke up and realized that she should have never left me that i am all she needs.To make thing clear, her life with her high school lover was great before Dr brave castled the spell they had no disagreement on anything.The guy said it himself that why she broke up with him is unexplainable.Only Dr.Brave can do such a thing contact him to solve your problem with his email:bravespellcaster@gmail.com ,or kindly visit he website http://bravespellcaster.yolasite.com .

    ReplyDelete