The things we saw and heard yesterday!

FRIDAY, SEPTEMBER 26, 2014

No further posts today:
As we do every few months, we’re heading north on Amtrak today to continue our tour of Medicaid-funded long-term care facilities.

As we do, we’re in a state of mild depression over the things we saw and heard yesterday—or perhaps over our inability to discuss them today.

What ever made us think that the Ray Rice matter was going to fade? Yesterday, the AP’s Rob Maaddi updated his earlier report about the claim that a copy of the damning second tape was sent to NFL offices.

In this update, we’re told who the tape was sent to—Jeffrey Miller, head of NFL security. But uh-oh!

We’re also told that there are two different Jeffrey Millers at NFL headquarters. We’re also told the following things, several of which are new:
MAADDI (9/25/14): The official, who spoke on condition of anonymity because he wasn't authorized to release details of the case, said he doesn't know if Miller ever saw the DVD or opened the package. His only communication with the NFL was a 12-second voicemail on April 9 from league offices confirming receipt of the package, in which a woman says, "You're right. It's terrible."

[...]

The official told the AP two weeks ago that he sent the video to the NFL, but asked the AP not to report that he had addressed the package to Miller. He eliminated that restriction Thursday.

"Since the NFLPA and NFL have launched separate investigations into the league and the Ravens' handling of Ray Rice's case, I want to make a few things clear. No one from the NFL ever asked me for the inside-elevator video," the official said Thursday. "I mailed it anonymously to Jeff Miller because he's their head of security. I attached a note saying: 'Ray Rice elevator video. You have to see it. It's terrible.' I provided a number for a disposable cellphone and asked for confirmation that it was received. I knew there was a possibility Mr. Miller may not get the video, but I hoped it would land in the right hands."
(Just for the record: Two weeks ago, we were told that the anonymous law enforcement official didn’t want to name the NFL executive to whom he sent the tape because it might blow his cover. Maaddi doesn’t explain why that fear no longer obtains.)

Assuming the basic facts in that passage are correct, did anyone actually look at the tape when it apparently reached NFL offices? We have no way of knowing.

But we find it easy to imagine that some receptionist dropped the tape from the anonymous sender with the 13-word cover note directly into her office waste basket, assuming it was the tape that everyone had already seen and assuming that it had been sent by a semi-nut.

(Every one of our sainted aunts would have called the anonymous mailer back, sharing the conventional view that “You’re right, it’s terrible,” as of course it always seemed to be, just based on the first tape.)

We can also imagine incriminating possibilities. By law, only those possibilities can be considered on cable.

Chris Hayes and Mike Pesca did another horrible job with this topic last night. (Hayes was worse than Pesca.) Two weeks later, Hayes still hasn’t noticed the obvious problem with ESPN’s original “four sources,” the sources who said that Rice was honest with Goodell in their June 16 meeting (which Hayes think occurred “early on”).

As we noted way back when, ESPN never claimed that these sources actually attended the meeting in question. Beyond that, the sources were identified as “sources close to Rice.”

To Hayes, those rather shaky four sources remain the thrilling definitive sources. On cable, complications and uncertainties aren’t allowed to spoil the chase. In fairness, this is good for business. It supports a ripe salary structure.

At ESPN, the highly underwhelming Bill Simmons has been suspended. At Slate, Josh Levin gives us a look at Simmons’ background.

As it turns out, Simmons is the kind of Boston guy who likes to call people whores while thrilling us with his interactions with porn stars. Levin doesn’t seem to have a strong grasp of the overall matter here, but he does issue the definitive statement of the way these chases work:
LEVIN (9/25/14): The problem for ESPN is that Simmons said what everyone in America wants to hear right now. The only way Roger Goodell could be less popular is if video emerged of him burning the Ray Rice video, cackling maniacally, and whispering, “I’ll never tell.” Simmons said what he believed, with no bullshit and no filter. This was the Sports Guy at his best: righteous, angry, and probably correct. (On Thursday the AP reported that a law enforcement official sent the Rice video to the NFL’s head of security back in April.)
We have no idea why Levin thinks that Simmons was “probably correct” when he called Goodell a liar, dropping his F- and BS-bombs to show us he really means it. But in that passage, Levin defines the essence of the cable chase:

In our Salem Village chases, people like Simmons “say what everyone in America wants to hear right now,” if possible in a “righteous, angry” manner. People like Levin then tell us that these people are sincere.

The game has been played this way a long time. It’s very good business for people like Simmons. Here's the problem:

In the 1990s, the object of the chase wasn’t Roger Goodell. The object of the chase was President Clinton. Then it was Candidate Gore.

Are you happy with the way that chase worked out? We’re now in our second war in Iraq because people like Hayes and Levin played along, all through that era, with the righteous, angry assertions of people like Simmons.

Today, that low-IQ culture continues. Luckily, it’s only Goodell they’re chasing this time. But people! Just wait! Give them time!

57 comments:

  1. "But we find it easy to imagine that some receptionist dropped the tape from the anonymous sender with the 13-word cover note directly into her office waste basket, assuming it was the tape that everyone had already seen and assuming that it had been sent by a semi-nut."

    Yes, Bob. For you, it is always "easy to imagine" scenarios that fit the narrative you want to advance, no matter how preposterous.

    However, it is very difficult for me to "imagine" a "receptionist" (better look up that job description), who has the responsibility of opening all mail that comes to the NFL not knowing what to throw away and what to pass along. We can only wonder about what other mail this "receptionist" has immediately and routinely tossed in the circular file because he/she (yes, Bob, receptionists can be male these days), and how long she/he has held his/her job while tossing correspondence that turns out to be pretty important.

    Or is it "easy to imagine" that this was the first time said mail-opening and inspecting "receptionist" had done such a thing? Then called the "semi-nut" who sent it and acknowledged receipt?

    After all, it was "easy to imagine" a "legitimate traffic study" after a mountain of evidence and testimony slammed the door on that notion.

    By the way, Bob, join the 21st Century. This wasn't a "tape." It was a DVD.





    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I agree that it is not easy to imagine a receptionist throwing out any mail.

      The point is larger than that specific scenario. It is that when you don't know what happened, any of a variety of possibilities could be true. You don't assume your preferred scenario in the face of alternatives. Somerby is trying to propose alternative scenarios. I don't think he hit on a plausible one, but his point is still valid -- something else may be true besides what the media are assuming happened.

      Delete
    2. It is very easy to "propose alternative scenarios" if your imagination is not cursed by the limitations of common sense.

      Bottom line is that Goodell took this whole matter rather lightly, and even he has admitted that.

      What is truly f-bomb worthy is the "scenario" Goodell advance to explain it all away -- the perp and the victim lied to me.

      Of course, these are scenarios that a person whose only interest is in "proving" that everything that happens in the world is some sort of liberal media Salem Witch Hunt conspiracy would easily accept, as he "imagines" even more preposterous scenarios that could be true, and even stand as true until "disproven, on a journalistic basis."

      Can you imagine Somerby back in 1974? He'd be swallowing the whole "Rosemary Woods could have erased those 18 minutes" scenario.


      Delete
    3. I think you're wrong in your fourth paragraph. Proving is important because people are innocent until proven guilty. So the scenario you present for the person who wants to prove is only one small part of the spectrum. Legally, we all need proof before we can call him guilty.

      That said, I am not the smartest person in the world. I'm a high school dropout and don't know that much. So you may be right. I don't really care either way. Have a good weekend!

      Delete
    4. Why is it hard to imagine that Rice lied to Goodell? I think that it is entirely plausible that someone caught in a bad situation might tell a story that is not entirely truthful in order to minimize their actions or to evade consequences of their actions. People do that all the time, sometimes consciously and sometimes in a self-serving but not deliberate way, perhaps due to convenient memory. I think Goodell might have felt he had been lied to by Rice.

      Delete
    5. Oh, I have no problem imagining that the Rices attempted to minimize the whole thing instead of telling the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.

      But the problem here is the Goodell apologists think that that is all Goodell had to do. Call the couple in, have them explain themselves, then accept their story without further investigation.

      Delete
    6. "Legally, we all need proof before we can call him guilty."

      And how do you gather that evidence? By calling in the perp, and taking his story for what it was (and there are now even doubts as to Goodell's claim about how slippery, deceptive and non-forthcoming the Rices were -- seems they might have told him more then Goodell lets on).

      Or do you also view the DVD you were sent?

      Or do you hope that the public is stupid enough to "imagine" that a "receptionist" threw it away?


      Delete
    7. The point here is not how a court would prove someone's guilt, or an investigating body such as the NFL, but whether the media, lacking knowledge, should make assertions and behave as if they were true in the absence of supporting evidence. Media figures shouldn't chase their own fantasies. Their job is retain some objective distance when there is ambiguity in a situation, not act as partisans by assuming the worst about designated villains.

      Delete
    8. You see it as "media figures chasing their own fantasies" to ask tough questions of people in authority and not merely accept the spin they want to put on it.

      The only person here "imagining" fantasies to put into print and disseminate is Somerby and his incompetent "receptionist" fantasy.

      Delete
    9. I think assuming that Goodell is the one lying constitutes chasing a fantasy.

      Delete
    10. Gee, that's exactly what Somerby "thinks" too. Funny how the sheep think so much like their shepherd, isn't it?

      Delete
    11. Go ahead and take that last step...call us sheeple. You know you want to do it.

      Delete
    12. I love how Bob and all his fans think they're so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, smart.

      Delete
    13. An amazing testimony on a spell caster who brought my husband back to me.. My name is Olivia Phimzile,i live in Kansas,USA,and I'm happily married to a lovely and caring husband ,with two kids.A very big problem occurred in my family seven months ago,between me and my husband .so terrible that he took the case to court for a divorce.he said that he never wanted to stay with me again,and that he didn't love me anymore.So he packed out of the house and made me and my children passed through severe pain. I tried all my possible means to get him back,after much begging,but all to no avail.and he confirmed it that he has made his decision,and he 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 husband .So i explained every thing to him,so he told me that the only way i can get my husband back,is to visit a spell caster,because it has really worked for him too.So i never believed in spell,but i had no other choice,than to follow his advice. Then he gave me the email address of the spell caster whom he visited.{tanasiajobs210@gmail.com}. So the next morning,i sent a mail to the address he gave to me,and the spell caster assured me that i will get my husband back the next day.What an amazing statement!! I never believed,so she spoke with me,and told me everything that i need to do. Then the next morning, So surprisingly, my husband who didn't call me for the past seven {7}months,gave me a call to inform me that he was coming back.So Amazing!! So that was how he came back that same day,with lots of love and joy,and he apologized for his mistake,and for the pain he 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, i will advice you out there to kindly visit the same email tanasiajobs210@gmail.com,if you are in any condition like this,or you have any problem related to "bringing your ex back. So thanks to the Dr Tansia for bringing back my husband ,and brought great joy to my family once again. {tanasiajobs210@gmail.com}, Thanks

      Delete
    14. My name is tucker stacey.This is a very joyful day of my life because of the help Dr.Trust has rendered to me by helping me get my ex husband back with his magic and love spell. i was married for 6 years and it was so terrible because my husband was really cheating on me and was seeking for a divorce but when i came across Dr.Trust email on the internet on how he help so many people to get thier ex back and help fixing relationship.and make people to be happy in their relationship. i explained my situation to him and then seek his help but to my greatest surprise he told me that he will help me with my case and here i am now celebrating because my Husband has change totally for good. He always want to be by me and can not do anything without my present. i am really enjoying my marriage, what a great celebration. i will keep on testifying on the internet because Dr.Trust is truly a real spell caster. DO YOU NEED HELP THEN CONTACT DOCTOR TRUST NOW VIA EMAIL: Ultimatespellcast@yahoo.com or call +2348156885231 or ultimatespellcast@gmail.com. He is the only answer to your problem and make you feel happy in your relationship.

      Delete
  2. It seems odd that law enforcement officials sent the elevator recording to the NFL and no one else. Didn't anyone from the media ask for it back last spring?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. He hit his fiance, not a cop. If he hit a cop every TV station in NJ and Maryland would have been given a copy by the AC police as well as the networks. If the cops has hit the Rice's, nobody would have seen the video until a judge ordered it released.

      Delete
  3. In my working days, I had an in-box full of stuff. Meanwhile there phone calls to return, meetings to attend, and actual work projects, which were what I was being paid for. If a tape had landed in my in-box under these circumstances, I might have just stuck it aside. It would have appeared to have low priority.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. So in your line of work, how many "tapes" did you throw away or stuck aside that came with a note that it involved a "work project that I was being paid for"?

      Or did your "receptionist" throw it away?

      Delete
    2. I send tapes and DVDs directly to Dave in CA. Anything important would be on a thumb drive.

      Delete
    3. Many businesses are still using obsolete technology because their old equipment still works and they don't want to spend money upgrading it. There could be videotape security systems still in use.

      Delete
    4. Oh, I suppose so, if you want to dream up the scenario that a casino wouldn't have the latest security system available.

      But in this case, the NFL got a DVD. No big deal, but Bob is clearing showing his age, and his laziness.

      Delete
  4. How did the media report on Gore's choice of VP in real time?

    ReplyDelete
  5. As I recall, they talked about balancing the ticket North-South, since Lieberman was from New England, mentioned that he was Jewish and said he had more foreign relations and defense experience. Gore was emphasizing that he had been lied to by Clinton, misled in his defense of him and Lieberman was one of the most outspoken critics of Clinton's sexual behavior. I believe the press mentioned that this was a distancing move on Gore's part. As I recall, Gore did not emphasize his climate interests during the campaign. He also tended not to run on Clinton's strengths, which was later seen as a mistake.

    I'm sure someone will correct me if my memory of this is wrong.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. And as I recall, the media also covered "distancing moves" by Nixon, Humphrey, Mondale, and Bush I as well, under the theory that a Veep seeking to be president has to convince voters he will be "his own man."

      Delete
    2. This comment has been removed by the author.

      Delete
    3. Nixon was not distancing himself from Eisenhower in 1960 when he chose the administration's only, up until that time, U.N. Ambassador to run as his VP candidate. Henry Cabot Lodge II had broken with the Robert Taft anti-globalist, anti- fait accompli New Deal right wing of the Republican party to support the moderate -or, at least, the blank page- Eisenhower in 1952 and Lodge was about as "old money" as you could get.

      Delete
    4. Eisenhower distanced himself from Nixon in the 1960 campaign. At the end of a televised press conference in 1960 a reporter aksed him to name one of Nixon's policy ideas he had adopted, Eisenhower joked, "If you give me a week, I might think of one. I don't remember."

      Delete
    5. You're right @5:50 that one was a problem for Nixon.

      But here was the I am the decider context:

      [QUOTE]
      Note: President Eisenhower's one hundred and ninetieth news conference was held in the Executive Office Building from 10:30 to 11:01 o'clock on Wednesday morning, August 24, 1960. In attendance: 203.

      [About how way through]

      Q. Sarah McClendon, El Paso Times: Mr. President, will you tell us some of the big decisions that Mr. Nixon has participated in since you have been in the White House and he, as Vice President, has been helping you?

      THE PRESIDENT. Well, Mrs. McClendon, no one participates in the decisions. Now let's see, we just--I don't see why people can't understand this: no one can make a decision except me if it is in the national executive area. I have all sorts of advisers, and one of the principal ones is Mr. Nixon. But any Vice President that I should have, even if I did not admire and respect Mr. Nixon as I do, I would still keep him close in all these things, because I think any President owes it to the country to have the next individual in line of succession completely aware of what is going on. Otherwise, you have a break that is unconscionable and unnecessary.

      Now, if just when you talk about other people sharing a decision, how can they? No one can, because then who is going to be responsible? And because I have been raised as an Army individual and have used staffs, I think you will find no staff has ever thought that they made a decision as to what should be done or should not he done when I was a commander. And I don't think anyone in the Government will find or you can find anyone that would say differently.

      [The second to last question of the "news conference" which was the seventh question asked after McClendon]

      continued...

      Delete
    6. ...continued

      Q. Charles H. Mohr, Time Magazine: Mr. President, one of your answers to a previous question raises this question: one of the issues in this campaign is seeming to turn on the question of Mr. Nixon's experience, and the Republicans to some extent almost want to claim that he has had a great deal of practice at being President.

      Now, in answer to the other question, I wonder if it would be fair to assume that what you mean is that he has been primarily an observer and not a participant in the executive branch of the Government.

      In other words, many people have been trying to get at the degree that he has--I don't want to use that 'word "participated"--but acted in important decisions, and it is hard to pin down.

      THE PRESIDENT. Well, it seems to me that there is some confusion here--haziness--that possibly needs a lot of clarification.

      I said he was not a part of decision-making. That has to be in the mind and heart of one man. All right. Every commander that I have ever known, or every leader, or every head of a big organization, has needed and sought consultative conferences with his principal subordinates. In this case, they are normally Cabinet officers. They include also such people as the head of GSA, the Budget Bureau, and the Vice President as one of the very top.

      So the Vice President has participated for 8 years, or 7 Ѕ [sic] years, in all of the consultative meetings that have been held. And he has never hesitated--and if he had I would have been quite disappointed--he has never hesitated to express his opinion, and when he has been asked for it, expressed his opinion in terms of recommendation as to decision.

      But no one, and no matter how many differences or whether they are all unanimous--no one has the decisive power. There is no voting.

      It is just--you could take this body here, and say, "Look, we are going to do something about the streets down here, about parking around here for you people." All right. Now, everybody has got his say. But I have to handle, let's say, around the White House, and so who is going to decide--I am; not this body. So Mr. Nixon has taken a full part in every principal discussion.

      Q. Mr. Mohr: We understand that the power of decision is entirely yours, Mr. President. I just wondered if you could give us an example of a major idea of his that you had adopted in that role, as the decider and final--

      THE PRESIDENT. If you give me a week, I might think of one. I don't remember.

      Jack Bell, Associated Press: Thank you, Mr. President.
      [END QUOTE]

      Delete
    7. McClendon's question was the thirteenth of the news conference, Mohr's final two were the twentieth and the twenty-first.

      Delete
    8. CMike, great responses. Seems like Ike sort of said "During my Presidency I took the initiative in creating the decisions" and the press came up with "Ike says Nixon didn't invent "jack squat or squadoosh."

      Of course it only seems that way. The press corps didn't turn into a pack of plutocrat whores until the War on Clinton which got turned into the War on Gore.

      So seemeth to sayeth the OTB.

      Delete
    9. ZKod,

      Are you suggesting Nixon was the victim bad press coverage in the 1960 election along the lines of what Gore was subjected to in the 2000 election? Somebody should tell Somerby so he can get some perspective-
      -oh wait.

      [QUOTE]
      Forty years later, it’s embarrassing to read White explain how JFK’s “kindliness” tilted the coverage—and it’s embarrassing to read his credulous account of the hopeful’s great love for the press corps. Kennedy “has an enormous respect for those who work with words and those whom write clean prose,” the scrivener gushed. “He likes newspapermen and likes their company.” Nor did White fail to note the way Kennedy staffers co-opted the press. “It was not only that they respected the press,” he wrote, “but somehow as if they were part of the press—half hankering to be writing the dispatches themselves.”

      But where, oh where had the skeptic gone as Teddy White churned these embarrassing lines? Was it true? Were Kennedy’s aides “hankering to be writing the dispatches themselves?” You can bet your sweet bippy they had such a hankering—and, according to White’s landmark text, their fawning conduct allowed them to “color” all reporting that came off their plane.

      With Nixon, though, things were different. The Republican “held himself aloof,” White said. “[E]rratically, he would sometimes permit reporters to ride his personal plane and other times forbid it.” And according to White, “the hostility between the press and the Nixon campaign” was, at least in major part, “a fruit of this trivial disdain.” Reporters have feelings too, dear reader. “[T]he sense of dignity of these men, their craftsmen’s pride in their calling, was abused by Mr. Nixon,” White says. And guess what? “Nixon’s personal distrust of the press colored the attitude of his press staff, too.” The results of this axis of evil weren’t pretty."

      At the beginning of the campaign,” White judged, “the reporters assigned to Mr. Nixon were probably split down the middle between those friendly and those hostile to him.” But by the end of the race, “he had succeeded in making them predominantly into that which he had feared from the outset—hostile.”

      Wow! There’s the very image of that very well known and much bruited ol’ debbil, “liberal bias!” Reporters sang songs on JFK’s plane and rolled their eyes when thrown in with Tricky Dick! The irony, of course, is that similar images emerged from Campaign 2000—but the party affiliations were plainly reversed. In Campaign 2000, major scribes penned detailed reports about the Big Party on Bush’s plane—and about the poisonous relations between corps and Gore. According to a string of reports, it was Bush (and McCain) who fawned to the press, and Gore whom reporters now hated.
      [END QUOTE]

      Delete
  6. We have to wait for all the facts to come out. we do not know if the head of security saw the video and if he did notified Goodell about it.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. It's bad either way.

      Either the head of security saw it or he didn't. Sort of raises serious questions either way, doesn't it?

      Not for the wild imagination of Bob Somerby, however.

      Delete
    2. Either the head of security saw it or he didn't. That raises serious questions for me, either way.

      But not for the wild imagination of Bob Somerby, however.

      Delete
    3. Oops, got an Error 503 message the first time, and it somehow got published. Sorry for the redundancy.

      Delete
    4. Redundancy at the Howler? The horror makes my liberal mind melt.

      Delete
  7. I still don't understand why Roger Goodell, in order to be considered worthy of keeping his job, was expected to be investigator, judge, jury and executioner in the legal matter of Ray Rice's assault on his wife. I thought the American criminal justice system was designed to assure disinterested justice in such matters.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I agree. This has not made sense to me either. My husband asked what happens when a teacher is accused of doing something that threatens their job. They are suspended with pay while the people who are supposed to follow up do their jobs (e.g., police). You cannot fire someone who has not been judged guilty but you also cannot let them remain in the classroom, so they are put on administrative duties. Rice could have been suspended from playing but not kicked off the team while the police investigated what happened. He was sentenced already because he admitted his crime. The NFL is supposed to decide on its own actions based on that -- not conduct a new investigation involving video and testimony. Rice admitted committing an assault. Why is there not a policy about what happens to his job based on that FACT?

      Delete
    2. You two jokers don't follow professional sports much, do you?

      Delete
  8. The post is written in very a good manner and it entails many useful information for me.
    I am happy to find your distinguished way of writing the post.
    Now you make it easy for me to understand and implement the concept.
    Love msg

    ReplyDelete

  9. I am really happy after reading your post.
    The post contains all the aspects that I was serching for a long time.
    Such a informative post indeed.
    Diwali sms

    ReplyDelete

  10. There are some interesting points in this post but I don’t know if I see all of them heart to eye .
    There is some validness but I will hold opinion until I look into it further.
    Good clause, thanks and we want more! Added to Feed Burner likewise.
    md-waysms

    ReplyDelete
  11. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  12. hey, wish you happy valentine's day 2015 to all of you :) and here are many beautiful collections of happy valentine's day 2015 gift's ideas for girlfriend. who feel very special to your lover,, and guys be ready to celebrate happy valentine's day 2015 because it's not so far... enjoy every moment with your love,,,,,http://happyvalentinesday2015z.com/valentines-day-2015-gifts-girlfriend/

    ReplyDelete
  13. find : happy valentine's day 2015 gifts ideas for girlfriend. and wish you very happy valentine's day 2015 to all of you ,, be ready to celebrate guys ,, it's not so far
    http://happyvalentinesday2015z.com/valentines-day-2015-gifts-girlfriend/

    ReplyDelete
  14. http://happyvalentinesday2015z.com/valentines-day-2015-gifts-girlfriend/

    ReplyDelete

  15. An amazing testimony on a spell caster who brought my husband back to me.. My name is James Mack ,i live in California ,USA,and I'm happily married to a lovely and caring husband ,with two kids.A very big problem occurred in my family seven months ago,between me and my husband .so terrible that he took the case to court for a divorce.he said that he never wanted to stay with me again,and that he didn't love me anymore.So he packed out of the house and made me and my children passed through severe pain. I tried all my possible means to get him back,after much begging,but all to no avail.and he confirmed it that he has made his decision,and he 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 husband .So i explained every thing to him,so he told me that the only way i can get my husband back,is to visit a spell caster,because it has really worked for him too.So i never believed in spell,but i had no other choice,than to follow his advice. Then he gave me the email address of the spell caster whom he visited.{ogbonispelitemple@hotmail.com}. So the next morning,i sent a mail to the address he gave to me,and the spell caster assured me that i will get my husband 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 husband who didn't call me for the past seven {10}months,gave me a call to inform me that he was coming back.So Amazing!! So that was how he came back that same day,with lots of love and joy,and he apologized for his mistake,and for the pain he 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, i will advice you out there to kindly visit the same website { http://ogbonispeli.webs.com/ },if you are in any condition like this,or you have any problem related to "bringing your ex back. So thanks to the Dr Brave for bringing back my husband ,and brought great joy to my family once again. {ogbonispelitemple@hotmail.com},Thanks for reading.

    ReplyDelete
  16. http://www.delhielection2015result.com/

    ReplyDelete
  17. My name is dante meet, and I base in U.S.A...My life is back!!! After 2 years of Broken marriage, my husband left me with two kids . I felt like my life was about to end i almost committed suicide, i was emotionally down for a very long time. Thanks to a spell caster called Dr Jatto, which i met online. On one faithful day, as I was browsing through the internet,I came across allot of testimonies about this particular spell caster. Some people testified that he brought their Ex lover back, some testified that he restores womb,cure cancer,and other sickness, some testified that he can cast a spell to stop divorce and so on. i also come across one particular testimony,it was about a woman called luis francisca,she testified about how he brought back her Ex lover in less than 2 days, and at the end of her testimony she dropped Dr Jatto E-mail address. After reading all these,I decided to give it a try. I contacted him VIA Email and explained my problem to him. In just 48hours, my husband came back to me. We solved our issues, and we are even happier than before Dr Jatto, is really a gifted man and i will not stop publishing him because he is a wonderful man... If you have a problem and you are looking for a real and genuine spell caster to solve all your problems for you. Try drjattosplltemple@gmail.com anytime, he might be the answer to your problems. Here's his Email drjattosplltemple@gmail.com OR CALL +2349035512062.
    1. GETTING YOUR EX BACK
    2. WINNING LOTTERIES.
    3. CHILD BEARING.
    4. BREAKING OF GENERATION COURSE.
    5. GETTING OF JOB.
    6. JOB PROMOTION.
    7. MONEY SPELL.
    8. SPIRITUAL PROTECTION.
    9. HERBAL CARE.
    10. BEAUTY SPELL.

    ReplyDelete
  18. My name is tucker stacey.This is a very joyful day of my life because of the help Dr.Trust has rendered to me by helping me get my ex husband back with his magic and love spell. i was married for 6 years and it was so terrible because my husband was really cheating on me and was seeking for a divorce but when i came across Dr.Trust email on the internet on how he help so many people to get thier ex back and help fixing relationship.and make people to be happy in their relationship. i explained my situation to him and then seek his help but to my greatest surprise he told me that he will help me with my case and here i am now celebrating because my Husband has change totally for good. He always want to be by me and can not do anything without my present. i am really enjoying my marriage, what a great celebration. i will keep on testifying on the internet because Dr.Trust is truly a real spell caster. DO YOU NEED HELP THEN CONTACT DOCTOR TRUST NOW VIA EMAIL: Ultimatespellcast@yahoo.com or call +2348156885231 or ultimatespellcast@gmail.com. He is the only answer to your problem and make you feel happy in your relationship.

    ReplyDelete
  19. My name is tucker stacey.This is a very joyful day of my life because of the help Dr.Trust has rendered to me by helping me get my ex husband back with his magic and love spell. i was married for 6 years and it was so terrible because my husband was really cheating on me and was seeking for a divorce but when i came across Dr.Trust email on the internet on how he help so many people to get thier ex back and help fixing relationship.and make people to be happy in their relationship. i explained my situation to him and then seek his help but to my greatest surprise he told me that he will help me with my case and here i am now celebrating because my Husband has change totally for good. He always want to be by me and can not do anything without my present. i am really enjoying my marriage, what a great celebration. i will keep on testifying on the internet because Dr.Trust is truly a real spell caster. DO YOU NEED HELP THEN CONTACT DOCTOR TRUST NOW VIA EMAIL: Ultimatespellcast@yahoo.com or call +2348156885231 or ultimatespellcast@gmail.com. He is the only answer to your problem and make you feel happy in your relationship.

    ReplyDelete