This is what propaganda looks like!

MONDAY, JUNE 3, 2019

Warning! Children at play!
Yesterday morning, we flipped over to Joy Reid's MSNBC show for only the briefest of seconds.

We flipped over during the 10 AM Eastern hour. Within a matter of moments, we were watching legal expert Midwin Charles saying this about the Democrats' need to impeach Donald J. Trump:
CHARLES (6/2/19): Listen, when you have the truth on your side, you might as well rock it, right? This report came out about, what, 4, 5 weeks ago? Democrats have been in the position to take the narrative, you know, take the bull by the horns, frame the issue and take that narrative, but you know—

And I've been saying this on Twitter for the past week. I don't understand why the Dem—even before you get to impeachment, at least inform the American public of what is in that report and why it's so bad!

The fact that Mueller outlined ten different instances—not 2, not 4, not 8—ten different instances in which they believe that this president has obstructed justice is huge. And I think if the American public understood that—I don't understand why the Democrats aren't at the very least informing the public. Cut a one-minute video, put it on Facebook, YouTube, Twitter, every single platform, Instagram, all the stuff that the kids are into these days. Put it on tee-shirts, like put it wherever it is that you have to do it so at least the American populace is informed.
To watch the fuller exchange, click here, move to the 21-minute mark.

That's what we saw yesterday! We chuckled, but we also told an array of young analysts this:

That's what propaganda looks like, ratings-based "cable news" style!

It may not be intentional propaganda, but consider what Charles had done. With great passion, she said the Democrats should at least inform the American public of what is in the Mueller report. She then proceeded to flatly misstate what's found in that report!

Or at least so it seemed! Clearly, Charles seemed to be saying that Mueller had outlined ten different instances in which "they"—presumably, Mueller and his team—believe that Donald J. Trump has obstructed justice.

That's what Charles clearly seemed to say—but that of course is not what Mueller says in his report. By way of contrast, it's the sort of thing we liberals now hear on MSNBC as we get ourselves propagandized and brainwashed, and generally dumbed way down.

In his eponymous report, Mueller explicitly says that he and his team didn't reach any such determination concerning obstruction of justice. "This report does not conclude that the President committed a crime," Mueller says, specifically concerning obstruction, in the Conclusion to Part II of his report. Also this, again concerning obstruction of justice:

"The evidence we obtained about the President’s actions and intent presents difficult issues that would need to be resolved if we were making a traditional prosecutorial judgment."

It isn't just that Mueller's team didn't reach the determination Charles described, with Reid voicing Standard Tribal Assent. They even said there were "difficult issues" which would have to have been resolved before they could have made such a claim!

That said, MSNBC is increasingly a break-away colonized version of Fox. This helps explain why the New York Times wouldn't let its finance editor, David Enrich, appear on Rachel Maddow's increasingly embarrassing program last week. It also explains the good solid fun the children had last Friday afternoon and evening.

Uh-oh! During the 4 PM hour, the fuller transcript of a previously disclosed voicemail was released. On Deadline: White House, Nicolle Wallace and her merry band began to crack the mandated Mafia jokes.

The voicemail in question had gone from one lawyer to another. It was hard to see how the children on Wallace's program could really assess its tone or its content, or the nature of the relationship which existed between the lawyers in question.

That said, tribal fun never sleeps! NBC's increasingly undisciplined Carol Lee said the (previously disclosed) voicemail was "so amateur" and "so blatant," then said it "reads sort of threatening."

"Very Goodfellas!" Wallace replied. The fun took off from there.

The voicemail was "straight out of a mob movie," Wallace said, saying the fact that she isn't a lawyer "gives me a simpler lens on this thing." Additional fun emerged from the rest of the Knothole Gang:
CHUCK ROSENBERG (5/31/19): You can almost see Ray Liotta and Robert de Niro sitting in the dining room talking about this.

WALLACE: Totally!
Later, Charlie Sykes took his turn with the fun:
SYKES: What's interesting is, you made reference as to what movie this is. Is this Goodfellas, is this the Sopranos?

WALLACE: [Laughter] My Cousin Vinny?
That's what was interesting, Sykes now said. Sykes himself was interesting and serious before he hooked up with this gang. Rosenberg has also begun to suffer from his term of cable confinement.

According to leading anthropologists reporting to us from the future, this is where we humans ended up when no dissent, disagreement or alternate outlook was ever allowed on a TV "discussion" program. According to these future experts, over the course of the months and the years, humans placed in such situations were very strongly inclined to brainwash and propagandize themselves!

The foolishness continued that night. Chris Hayes embarrassed himself with his treatment of this general topic, though he managed to avoid the mandated Mafia reference. On the aforementioned Maddow Show, the host was of course less restrained.

She spent her standard twenty-plus opening minutes offering her own uninformed assessments of the various legal aspects of what had transpired that day. When she got to the voicemail excitement, she offered a fond remembrance:
MADDOW (5/31/19): The pieces of that transcript in the Mueller report read, and I remember reporting this at the time, right after the report came out, that voicemail read like a kind of Mafia-esque threat to Michael Flynn through his attorney, saying, "Hey, we know that you're cooperating. We want to know what you're going to give them on the president."

I mean, the "or else" was silent, but it was implied. I say that this is sort of a Mafia-esque thing, as it appears in the Mueller report, because it literally starts with the president's lawyer saying, "Let me see if I can't state it in starker terms."
The "or else" was implied, like so many other things this cable star hears inside her head. Meanwhile, no one but the Mafia has ever said "in starker terms!" Maddow was quick to see this!

As noted above, this bullshit helps explain why the New York Times now seems to be boycotting Maddow's program. She proceeded to offer one of her long dramatic readings of what she thought the voicemail in question actually said, reading between several lines and wandering across several others.

Maddow topped the Wallace gang, expressly saying that she's been saying "Mafia" all along. Later that night, Brian Williams also took an entertaining turn with the script.

Elliott Williams was guesting again. Brian began to entertain and dumbnify the troops:
ELLIOTT WILLIAMS (5/31/19): Even the information today—you know, so getting back to this John Dowd voicemail—

BRIAN WILLIAMS: Yes. Can I interrupt you with a dramatic reading especially for those who grew up in the New York area listening to Gambino recordings—

ELLIOTT WILLIAMS: Yes.

BRIAN WILLIAMS: —in the Ravenite Social Club, the Bergen Hunt and Fish Club? People perhaps should listen to this this way. This is a voice mail left by John Dowd, and you`ll forgive me because there's stuttering written in as part of this...
Brian proceeded to offer his own dramatic reading of the text of the voicemail. Like several others this day, he seemed to draw significance from the fact that the voicemail ended with the troubling words, "Thanks, pal."

This is the way this battleship of fools got Bush and Trump elected. After Brian finished his dramatic reading, his sidekick extended the fun:
BRIAN WILLIAMS: Elliot, what did we just hear? What does all that mean?

ELLIOTT WILLIAMS: Oh, my goodness. That was a beautiful reading, by the way, Brian.

BRIAN WILLIAMS: Thank you very much. I worked on it most of the day.

ELLIOTT WILLIAMS: You do Mafioso very well.

BRIAN WILLIAMS: Thanks.
Don't fool yourself into thinking that this is bracing social commentary or hard-hitting legal analysis. These are corporate children at play, children who are brainwashing themselves as per the current corporate agenda.

(When past agendas targeted Candidate Gore and Hillary Clinton, Brian spent years sliming them. Why did Gore's suit jackets have three buttons instead of two? Brian angrily asked again and again! This was before he got himself bumped off the air for inventing hero tales about his own Mitty-esque self. These are the people the suits employ to keep us rubes tuning in.)

No cable channel has ever produced so many "segregated" TV programs as MSNBC now does. On shows run by people like Wallace, you will literally never hear a single word from a single person who isn't simply advancing the tribal company line.

No word of caution, no alternate viewpoint, will ever be offered. You'll be told, for more than a year, that Mueller the God is going to frog-march everyone out of the White House. When nothing resembling that actually happens, people like Charles will start improving the facts and every bomb will be thrown.

These are not hard-hitting analysts. As a general matter, these are corporate entertainers, overpaid tribal clowns.

They've done tremendous damage this way over the course of the past thirty years. Anthropologists tell us that, due to our limited human wiring, this is all our species ever had—all we ever were.

Tomorrow: Too confusing for mainstream journalists! Mueller the God falls to earth!

40 comments:

  1. Once again Somerby argues that those 10 instances of obstruction of justice are not actually obstruction of justice because Mueller didn't charge any crimes in his report.

    That is so wrong. Mueller explained that he didn't have the authority to charge any crimes. It doesn't mean those 10 instances were not criminal acts. It means Mueller wasn't the one to indict Trump of them. He left that to Congress.

    Somerby wants to say that there were no crimes committed. Then he objects to MSNBC comments that treat Trump as a criminal and interpret other acts in the context of that fact. As if that voicemail does not stand as one instance amongst so many where Trump's associates have behaved like criminals trying to cover up ongoing criminal behavior. That is what is meant by references to mafiosi.

    Somerby's criticisms are not only useless against the wave of revelations about Trump and his cronies, there is no way Democrats and liberal media (who are, after all, liberal) are going to stop talking about this stuff and pointing out what is happening, how wrong Trump is, how criminal his actions.

    Somerby is doing his best, like a good foot soldier, to dampen the rising voice for impeachment. He has revealed himself to be a Trump enabler, if not supporter, and this kind of garbage is blatant in its attempt to undermine the credibility of those telling the truth about Trump.

    Somerby isn't being an asshole today -- he has taken sides against liberals and revealed himself for what he is.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. … Somerby argues that those 10 instances of obstruction of justice are not actually obstruction of justice because Mueller didn't charge any crimes in his report.

      Could you quote the passage for me? I can only find where TDH says that Mueller didn’t make any criminal findings about Trump.

      It means Mueller wasn't the one to indict Trump of them. He left that to Congress.

      Er, no. Congress has no power to indict. For federal crimes, only a grand jury can do that. Congress can impeach, but that’s different.

      Somerby wants to say that there were no crimes committed.

      Does TDH say that? If so, where? Or are you privy to TDH’s private wants?

      [T]his kind of garbage is blatant in its attempt to undermine the credibility of those telling the truth about Trump.

      If these truth-tellers are saying that Trump probably obstructed justice, then they’re probably right. If they’re saying that Mueller determined that Trump obstructed justice, then they’re not telling the truth.

      Somerby is doing his best … dampen the rising voice for impeachment.

      From a blog nobody reads? How’s that supposed to work?

      Delete
    2. You can't imagine that this is any kind of refutation of what I wrote.

      Delete
    3. Don't worry, nobody cares about deadrat's empty hair splitting as a function of being excessively literal, other than Republicans.

      Delete
    4. deadrat = dumb, womanish

      Delete
    5. You can't imagine that this is any kind of refutation of what I wrote.

      Well, I kinda did, at least in part.

      I noted two statements of fact, which are refutable:

      1. TDH argues that Trump’s “10 instances of obstructions” are not crimes. But I can’t find where TDH says that. He only talks about Mueller’s actions with respect to the 10 instances.

      2. Mueller left indictments of Trump to Congress. That’s not possible.

      If I didn’t read the blog entry carefully enough for 1, all you have to do is quote the passage I missed.
      For 2, perhaps you meant impeachment, not indictment.

      I noted three of your opinions that I think are ill founded but which really aren’t refutable:

      1. TDH wants to say there were no crimes. I don’t think TDH actually says there were no crimes, and if that’s what he wanted to say, I think he’d just say it.

      2. TDH attempts to undermine the credibility of those telling the truth about Trump. I think that’s true to the extent that some of those telling the truth about Trump are also telling porkies, e.g., if they report that Mueller determined that Trump obstructed justice. Mueller didn’t do that.

      3. TDH is doing his best to stop impeachment. I suppose that could be technically true for values of “doing his best” equal to complete futility. Who do you think is reading this blog?

      Delete
    6. "Who do you think is reading this blog?"

      Right-wingers looking for confirmation of their memes.

      Delete
    7. Really? Like the meme that Trump is mentally ill?

      Delete
    8. Hello friends! My Name is Wendy from Canada i have had a lot about Dr AKHERE on his good work, for bringing back lost relationship but i never believe because so many spell caster scam me because of my husband who left me and three kids over a year and two months. so a good friend of mine introduce me to Dr AKHERE just because my condition was so bad and the responsibility in my matrimonia home was more than me. my husband left me to another woman just because i don't have male child for him. so i email Dr AKHERE and told him everything, he told me not to worry that my husband will come back and i will have a male child for him. he only told me to believe on him that after casting the spell my husband will come back immediately and beg for forgiveness. he real did it for me and my husband come back to me in the nest two days. i was very happy and thanks dr AKHERE. so, i was in this situation (April 18 2014) i told Dr AKHERE that i will start shearing his testimony to every one in the word if he make me to have a male child to my husband. and he also did it as am shearing this testimony to every one out dear, that am with my new bouncy baby boy. now i believe that i am the happiest woman on earth because Dr AKHERE restore my life in my matrimonial home you can thank him for me or email him for urgent help in any bad situation i promise you he will also help you; his email address is Email him: AKHERETEMPLE@gmail.com or
      call/whatsapp:+2349057261346




      Hello friends! My Name is Wendy from Canada i have had a lot about Dr AKHERE on his good work, for bringing back lost relationship but i never believe because so many spell caster scam me because of my husband who left me and three kids over a year and two months. so a good friend of mine introduce me to Dr AKHERE just because my condition was so bad and the responsibility in my matrimonia home was more than me. my husband left me to another woman just because i don't have male child for him. so i email Dr AKHERE and told him everything, he told me not to worry that my husband will come back and i will have a male child for him. he only told me to believe on him that after casting the spell my husband will come back immediately and beg for forgiveness. he real did it for me and my husband come back to me in the nest two days. i was very happy and thanks dr AKHERE. so, i was in this situation (April 18 2014) i told Dr AKHERE that i will start shearing his testimony to every one in the word if he make me to have a male child to my husband. and he also did it as am shearing this testimony to every one out dear, that am with my new bouncy baby boy. now i believe that i am the happiest woman on earth because Dr AKHERE restore my life in my matrimonial home you can thank him for me or email him for urgent help in any bad situation i promise you he will also help you; his email address is Email him: AKHERETEMPLE@gmail.com or
      call/whatsapp:+2349057261346

      Delete
  2. Where can I buy my t-shirt?

    ReplyDelete
  3. It should be no surprise that Republicans want to spin the contents of the Mueller Report differently than Democrats. The question is why Somerby has adopted the conservative spin.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. "Conservative spin" is that Mueller exonerated Trump. TDH says that Mueller neither exonerated Trump nor found grounds to indict him. Do you see the difference?

      Delete
    2. What then was the rest of that 440 page report? That is what Somerby is ignoring and one cannot ignore the 10 instances of obstruction described, with evidence, in Mueller's report.

      If it were as simple as you (and Somerby?) want to make it, the report could have been very short. But he wrote a great deal more and that is what everyone else is talking about.

      Delete
    3. @deadrat:

      “TDH says that Mueller neither exonerated Trump nor found grounds to indict him.”

      That is incorrect. Mueller was *never going to indict Trump*, due to DOJ policy. Mueller said so in his report. He also did not say he found no grounds.

      Mueller said the following:

      “under longstanding department policy, a president cannot be charged with a federal crime while he is in office....Charging the president with a crime was therefore not an option we could consider.”

      “the Constitution requires a process other than the criminal justice system to formally accuse a sitting president of wrongdoing.”

      “it would be unfair to potentially accuse somebody of a crime when there can be no court resolution of the actual charge.”

      “And as set forth in the report, after that investigation, if we had had confidence that the president clearly did not commit a crime, we would have said so. “

      Delete
    4. Point taken. But even if Mueller decided he couldn't indict Trump because as President, Trump was unindictable, then he could still have said that given what the investigation found, had Trump not been President then he would have been indicted. But that's not what Mueller said. Instead "[T]his report does not conclude that the President committed a crime, it also does not exonerate him." Presumably, if the report concluded otherwise, then it would have failed to recommend indictment solely on the grounds of Trump's position.

      It is nevertheless, still wrong to say that Mueller outlined 10 instance in which he believed Trump obstructed justice.

      Delete
    5. Don't forget that Mueller is a Republican. Why would he go out of his way to make such a gratuitous statement, not required by his mandate? He has given the Republicans maneuvering room while also doing his job competently. He is stonewalling Congress just like all the other Republicans. He won't do illegal or unethical stuff but he won't support Democratic interests either.

      All the evidence is there. Draw your own conclusion.

      Delete
    6. Oh, I've drawn the obvious conclusion from the copious evidence.

      What does that have to do with misrepresenting Mueller's report?

      Delete
  4. "could really assess its tone or its content."

    Tone can never be assessed from any written document. There is no "tone" in written text. That's for speech.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Somerby missed an opportunity to criticize Joy Reid.

    ReplyDelete
  6. "This is what propaganda looks like!"

    That's right, Bob, but you missed 'goebbelsian'.

    ReplyDelete
  7. This post is a mess. The link to a YouTube video of Reid’s show says “This video is unavailable.”

    Somerby provides no links to any of the other MSNBC shows he is quoting from.

    He says “During the 4 PM hour, the fuller transcript of a previously disclosed voicemail was released.” without stating what voicemail he is referring to. And is that 4pm Eastern, Central, what? Whose show?

    And “Chris Hayes embarrassed himself with his treatment of this general topic”, with not even the hint of an attempt to validate this remark.

    It is nearly impossible to judge the accuracy of Somerby’s criticism when he does this kind of thing. I refuse to spend hours tracking down the source material (that is the blogger’s job) and I refuse to accept Somerby’s version without seeing the evidence.

    ReplyDelete
  8. “Yesterday morning, we flipped over to Joy Reid's MSNBC show for only the briefest of seconds.”

    Anyone who believes this ought to enjoy purchasing the Verrazano Narrows bridge that I currently own.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Within a matter of moments, we were watching legal expert Midwin Charles saying this about the Democrats' need to impeach Donald J. Trump:

    More like Midwit Charlse, amirite?

    ReplyDelete
  10. We are assuming that the “voicemail” to which Somerby refers is John Dowd’s voicemail to Flynn’s lawyer on 11/22/2017.

    Of course Somerby fails to mention the reason why MSNBC hosts were talking about the voicemail last Friday (a judge in Flynn’s sentencing had ordered the release of the complete transcript).

    He fails to note the context in which Dowd left the voicemail, and that Mueller looked into it, saying in his report that the call "could have had the potential to affect Flynn's decision to cooperate, as well as the extent of that cooperation”, in other words, the call represented potential obstruction of justice.

    And, during the voicemail, Dowd is coy about his intent.

    With these details in mind, it seems apt to describe Dowd’s behavior as “Mafia-esque”.

    Why Somerby thinks a liberal commentator should refrain from describing it this way is unclear.

    ReplyDelete
  11. Whether or not Mueller had the authority to prosecute the President for a crime, they certainly had the ability to say that they believe he had committed a crime. That's what they were there to do.

    IMHO they did not have evidence sufficient to say Trump committed Obstruction of Justice. But, they were out to get Trump, so they presented this point in a way that makes him appear guilty.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. You didn't read the report, did you? You didn't listen to Mueller's 10 minute public statement either, did you?

      Delete
    2. @7:24 I did not read the report. I listened carefully to Mueller's 10 minute public statement. It's a shame that he didn't allow questions. Questions and answers could have clarified the ambiguous aspects that we are all guessing at and struggling to understand.

      Delete
    3. David, the report makes it clear Trump committed obstruction of justice, and more - it provides evidence of conspiring with Russia to rig the election. You really should read the report.

      Delete
    4. "I did not read the report."

      Who are you, Bill Barr?

      Delete
    5. "the report makes it clear Trump committed obstruction of justice, and more - it provides evidence of conspiring with Russia to rig the election. You really should read the report."

      Please provide the page numbers of the repory that support this wild claim.

      (You can't because your claim is false.)

      Delete
  12. “a blog nobody reads”

    This is deadrat’s (at 9:01 pm) description of Bob Somerby’s The Daily Howler. Of course, it is literally untrue, since deadrat himself reads it, as well as Mao, David in Cal, CMike, and quite a few anonymous commenters, including this nobody, and various other occasional named commenters.

    Kevin Drum, at Mother Jones, reads it.

    But deadrat may be correct in the sense that all of these commenters, including himself, and whoever else reads without commenting, are nobodies, in the sense of not having any importance in the world. We might agree with that.

    But of course, deadrat doesn’t know who reads Bob Somerby, so he is being presumptuous.

    But the larger farce is the realization that Bob Somerby’s The Daily Howler started out auspiciously and became something of an influential blog, but now has become, for some reason, a pure vanity blog which nobody reads, which he nonetheless continues to post endlessly ad infinitum for some reason which only he can understand. Future anthropologists will wonder why a blogger allowed such a promising blog dealing with an important topic to achieve zero influence after a strong start. Achieving and retaining an audience is something every successful comedian and blogger understands.

    We don’t know who is taking the more reasonable position:
    * Somerby has no influence because nobody reads his blog, therefore why worry if he utters misleading statements or anything at all (deadrat’s position)
    * or Somerby’s blog is read by some, perhaps many, of unknown influence and deserves enough respect to be engaged with and critiqued.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. it is literally untrue

      And trolls call me literal minded.

      I am often presumptuous, but I think you mean that I presume to know what I cannot, namely TDH’s readership. Presumably, but not presumptuously, TDH knows his traffic stats. Alas, he hasn’t shared them with his commentariat.

      I’ve judged TDH’s readership on the number of commenters he attracts and the number of sites that reference him, and compared with a site like say, dailykos.com, both those numbers are small. Most of the references are to other blog-type entities, which link to TDH. So it’s possible that the readership is much larger than I think.

      Somerby has no influence because nobody reads his blog, therefore why worry if he utters misleading statements or anything at all (deadrat’s position)

      If you’re not actually going to read what I write, please don’t tell me my “position.” Which isn’t that readers shouldn’t worry if TDH writes misleading things. I don’t think it merits much actual worry, but I’ve taken the trouble to correct things TDH has posted. And obviously, I accord TDH “enough respect” to “engage” with his blog.

      I point out my guess at TDH’s readership in response to commenters who despairingly talk of TDH’s large and baneful influence, some going so far as to speculate that TDH is on the Russian payroll.

      Delete
    2. "I point out my guess at TDH’s readership in response to commenters who despairingly talk of TDH’s large and baneful influence, some going so far as to speculate that TDH is on the Russian payroll."

      Shut the fuckup idiot. No one cares about the banal seepings of your third rate brain. Stop posting here so much. You're boring.

      Delete
    3. Anonymous @11:40A,

      Anonymous posts more and stupider stuff than I do. Why aren’t you complaining about Anonymous?

      Here’s the bottom line, Sparky. I post here for my own amusement, and as long as the blog owner permits comments from Mao, other and anonymous trolls, idiots like David in Cal, spell casters, and Mumbai movers, then I’ll post whatever and whenever I want.

      Mao is a self-confessed troll. If this were a moderated comment section, then I’d bet he would have been ban hammered. But it’s not and he’s still here. And Mao doesn’t bother me at all. You know why? Because I don’t read his comments. Try not reading mine: I always post under my id, so my comments are easy to spot.

      Anyway, why are you bothering with someone boring you don’t care about and who you think has a third rate brain. Just. Don’t. Read. What. I. Write.

      Alternatively, you can go fuck yourself.

      Pick an option and try it out. Either one you choose works for me.,

      Delete
    4. "Pick an option and try it out,"

      What a dumb fuckin' line.

      Look jackass, you keep posting here and I will find out where you live and I will go taekwondo on your ass.

      Then I'll put a spider on your head.

      Delete
    5. You're gonna feel ma grip dumb bitch.

      Delete
  13. Effective Love Spell To Get Your Ex Back My advise reveal you all to contact Dr happy the best on love spell at happylovespell2@gmail.com, here is my relationship story. About a month ago I got back to my ex(after 2 and half years separated).Everything was ok and she was the most adorable woman in the world. she spoke about wedding ceremony, how many kids we would have, said that our relationship was the most important thing in her life and she was 100% sure about it…Then she traveled to work in other country for 3 weeks. she changed his behavior completely. she disappeared every night, was saying she had to do some work and would talk to me later, but disappeared the rest of the day and night… no explanation, when I asked why she was disappearing every night, she stopped answering me. she’s ignoring me since last week, April 15. she ignored even my birthday, that was April 16. Not even a message. I wrote to her a few times trying to understand what happened, she read but just ignored me.I feel so bad cause I couldn’t stop contacting and trying to understand what happened.i loved her so much and wanted to get her back, then i was told to contact happylovespell2@gmail.com who can help out with a love spell to reunite your relationship back, so instantly do contact him and give him a try and trust me he did an urgent effective love spell for me and with in 24hours promise he made to me, my woman was back, today i testify to you all that you should seek and contact Dr happy for his spell result is genuine sure and guarantee unite and get your ex back save your marriage/relationship problem now,
    You can also know more about his spell Blogs site.http://happylovespel.blogspot.com.ng/
    Email him now on.. happylovespell2@gmail.com If you want to talk for more info or consultation. Whatsapp/cal +2348133873774 For more assurance and spell guarantee, visit his website...happylovespell2.webnode.com/

    ReplyDelete
  14. Hello friends! My Name is Wendy from Canada i have had a lot about Dr AKHERE on his good work, for bringing back lost relationship but i never believe because so many spell caster scam me because of my husband who left me and three kids over a year and two months. so a good friend of mine introduce me to Dr AKHERE just because my condition was so bad and the responsibility in my matrimonia home was more than me. my husband left me to another woman just because i don't have male child for him. so i email Dr AKHERE and told him everything, he told me not to worry that my husband will come back and i will have a male child for him. he only told me to believe on him that after casting the spell my husband will come back immediately and beg for forgiveness. he real did it for me and my husband come back to me in the nest two days. i was very happy and thanks dr AKHERE. so, i was in this situation (April 18 2014) i told Dr AKHERE that i will start shearing his testimony to every one in the word if he make me to have a male child to my husband. and he also did it as am shearing this testimony to every one out dear, that am with my new bouncy baby boy. now i believe that i am the happiest woman on earth because Dr AKHERE restore my life in my matrimonial home you can thank him for me or email him for urgent help in any bad situation i promise you he will also help you; his email address is Email him: AKHERETEMPLE@gmail.com or
    call/whatsapp:+2349057261346




    Hello friends! My Name is Wendy from Canada i have had a lot about Dr AKHERE on his good work, for bringing back lost relationship but i never believe because so many spell caster scam me because of my husband who left me and three kids over a year and two months. so a good friend of mine introduce me to Dr AKHERE just because my condition was so bad and the responsibility in my matrimonia home was more than me. my husband left me to another woman just because i don't have male child for him. so i email Dr AKHERE and told him everything, he told me not to worry that my husband will come back and i will have a male child for him. he only told me to believe on him that after casting the spell my husband will come back immediately and beg for forgiveness. he real did it for me and my husband come back to me in the nest two days. i was very happy and thanks dr AKHERE. so, i was in this situation (April 18 2014) i told Dr AKHERE that i will start shearing his testimony to every one in the word if he make me to have a male child to my husband. and he also did it as am shearing this testimony to every one out dear, that am with my new bouncy baby boy. now i believe that i am the happiest woman on earth because Dr AKHERE restore my life in my matrimonial home you can thank him for me or email him for urgent help in any bad situation i promise you he will also help you; his email address is Email him: AKHERETEMPLE@gmail.com or
    call/whatsapp:+2349057261346

    ReplyDelete
  15. I really want to appreciate Dr Ekpen of Ekpen Temple for restoring my broken relationship within 48 hours. It all started when I find out that my husband is cheating on me, when I try to confront him about it, the whole thing just got worst, because I love him so much I did not want to lose him to someone else so I went looking for solution that's how I came across Dr Ekpen who restore love back to my marriage. Contact him at (ekpentemple@gmail.com) if you are having challenges in your relationship.

    ReplyDelete
  16. I am so happy, i never believe i will be this happy again in life, I was working as an air-hoster ( cabby crew ) for 3years but early this year, i loose my job because of this deadly disease called Herpes virus (HSV), I never felt sick or have any symptom, till all workers were ask to bring their doctors report, that was how i got tested and i found out that am HSV positive that make me loose my job, because it was consider as an STD and is incurable disease, i was so depress was thinking of committing suicide, till i explain to a friend of mine, who always said to me a problem share is a problem solved, that was how she directed me to Dr Isibor, that was how i contacted him and get the medication from this doctor and i got cured for real, I just went back to my work and they also carry out the test to be real sure and i was negative. Please contact this doctor if you are herpes positive diseases his email is: drisiborspellhome@gmail.com. or you can call or whatsApp his mobile number +2348107855231.

    ReplyDelete