They aren't our best, folks

all 6 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 33 points 1 year ago

I miss being shocked by things, that was a fun time.

  • source
  • [+] 6 points 1 year ago (1 child)
  • [–] 5 points 1 year ago* (1 child)

    Here is the raw edited footage.

    Here is a virgin mother of 5.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago

    Whatever it shows it's always fuel for the disinfo fire. Apparently the fact years of underinvestment and poor servicing schedules could lead to a not quite up to scratch surveillance system is too unlikely for those drinking the disinfo firehose.

  • source
  • 31 comments in c/worldnews@lemmy.ml view that post
    [–] 184 points 1 year ago* (11 children)

    I can excuse Feds falsifying evidence to cover for their owners in the billionaire pedophile class, but I draw the line at using Adobe software

  • source
  • hideshow 11 child comments
  • [–] 8 points 1 year ago (7 children)

    What program should they have used?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [–] 19 points 1 year ago (3 children)

    Free and open source is the only ethical choice to use while serving the oligarchy.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 17 points 1 year ago* (2 children)

    Unironically, if all they did was just cut out parts they didn't want, using open source ffmpeg to rencode and strip metadata would have been the best way to do it.

    Using Adobe is just fucking sloppy. Not to mention, I'm pretty sure Adobe own any content that got uploaded to their servers during the edit. They likely have at least frames of it sitting on their servers if not the whole video.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 43 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children)

    The footage with the murderer is buried somewhere deep in Adobe secret database. I don't want to live in a world where Adobe can blackmail the goverment.

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 29 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    I don't want to live in a world where Adobe can blackmail the goverment.

    Oh they're 1000% already doing that, have you seen their goddamn prices?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 3 points 1 year ago*

    "We hope you are enjoying the apps and services in your Government subscription. We want to share an important update about your subscription.

    The price of the your plan will suffer an 57986% increase on your next renewal date.

    Your subscription will renew automatically.
    Price subject to change at renewal.
    Footage of you-know-who getting you-know-what subject to leakage during cancelation.

    You may cancel at any time via Adobe Customer Support. Adobe does not recommend cancelation during your current situation."

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 10 points 1 year ago

    For those stuck behind a paywall:

    www.wired.com Metadata Shows the FBI’s ‘Raw’ Jeffrey Epstein Prison Video Was Likely Modified Dhruv Mehrotra 9 - 11 minutes

    The United States Department of Justice this week released nearly 11 hours of what it described as “full raw” surveillance footage from a camera positioned near Jeffrey Epstein’s prison cell the night before he was found dead. The release was intended to address conspiracy theories about Epstein’s apparent suicide in federal custody. But instead of putting those suspicions to rest, it may fuel them further.

    Metadata embedded in the video and analyzed by WIRED and independent video forensics experts shows that rather than being a direct export from the prison’s surveillance system, the footage was modified, likely using the professional editing tool Adobe Premiere Pro. The file appears to have been assembled from at least two source clips, saved multiple times, exported, and then uploaded to the DOJ’s website, where it was presented as “raw” footage.

    Experts caution that it’s unclear what exactly was changed, and that the metadata does not prove deceptive manipulation. The video may have simply been processed for public release using available software, with no modifications beyond stitching together two clips. But the absence of a clear explanation for the processing of the file using professional editing software complicates the Justice Department’s narrative. In a case already clouded by suspicion, the ambiguity surrounding how the file was processed is likely to provide fresh fodder for conspiracy theories.

    Any aspect of the official story that isn’t fully explained will be co-opted by conspiracy theorists, says Mike Rothschild, an author who writes about conspiracy theories and extremists. “So whatever your flavor of Epstein conspiracy is, the video will help bolster it.”

    For months leading up to the joint memo the DOJ and FBI published Monday, attorney general Pam Bondi had promised the release of records related to Epstein, raising expectations that new, potentially incriminating details might surface about the disgraced financier’s death and his ties to powerful individuals. However, rather than revealing new information, the memo largely confirmed conclusions reached years earlier: that Epstein was found in a Manhattan prison cell on August 10, 2019, and died by suicide while awaiting trial on sex trafficking charges.

    To support its conclusion, the FBI reviewed surveillance footage overlooking the common area of the Special Housing Unit (SHU) at the Metropolitan Correctional Center (MCC), where Epstein was held. The FBI enhanced the footage by adjusting contrast, color, and sharpness, and released both the enhanced and what it described as the “raw” version. Both versions of the video appear to have been processed using Premiere and include much of the same metadata. According to the FBI, anyone entering the area containing Epstein’s cell during the relevant time frame would have been visible on that camera.

    Working with two independent video forensics experts, WIRED examined the 21-gigabyte files released by the DOJ. Using a metadata tool, reporters analyzed both Exchangeable Image File Format (EXIF) and Extensible Metadata Platform (XMP) data to identify signs of postprocessing.

    The “raw” file shows clear signs of having been processed using an Adobe product, most likely Premiere, based on metadata that specifically references file extensions used by the video editing software. According to experts, Adobe software, including Premiere and Photoshop, leaves traces in exported files, often embedding metadata that logs which assets were used and what actions were taken during editing. In this case, the metadata indicates the file was saved at least four times over a 23-minute span on May 23, 2025, by a Windows user account called “MJCOLE~1.” The metadata does not show whether the footage was modified before each time it was saved.

    The embedded data suggest the video is not a continuous, unaltered export from a surveillance system, but a composite assembled from at least two separate MP4 files. The metadata includes references to Premiere project files and two specific source clips—2025-05-22 21-12-48.mp4 and 2025-05-22 16-35-21.mp4. These entries appear under a metadata section labeled “Ingredients,” part of Adobe’s internal schema for tracking source material used in edited exports. The metadata does not make clear where in the video the two clips were spliced together.

    Hany Farid, a professor at UC Berkeley whose research focuses on digital forensics and misinformation, reviewed the metadata at WIRED’s request. Farid is a recognized expert in the analysis of digital images and the detection of manipulated media, including deepfakes. He has testified in numerous court cases involving digital evidence.

    Farid says the metadata raises immediate concerns about chain of custody—the documented handling of digital evidence from collection to presentation in a courtroom. Just like physical evidence, he explains, digital evidence must be handled in a way that preserves its integrity; metadata, while not always precise, can provide important clues about whether that integrity has been compromised.

    “If a lawyer brought me this file and asked if it was suitable for court, I’d say no. Go back to the source. Do it right,” Farid says. “Do a direct export from the original system—no monkey business.”

    Farid points to another anomaly: The video’s aspect ratio shifts noticeably at several points. “Why am I suddenly seeing a different aspect ratio?” he asks.

    Farid cautions that while the metadata clearly shows the video was modified, the changes could be benign—for example, converting footage from a proprietary surveillance format to a standard MP4.

    While there may be uncontroversial explanations for the metadata artifacts, such as stitching together multiple days of footage during compilation, or the routine export of surveillance footage to an mp4 format, the FBI did not respond to specific questions about the file’s processing, instead referring WIRED to the DOJ. The DOJ in turn referred inquiries back to the FBI and the Bureau of Prisons. The BOP did not respond to a request for comment.

    According to a 2023 report from the DOJ Office of the Inspector General (OIG), MCC, the detention facility where Epstein was found hanged, had around 150 analog surveillance cameras—but starting on July 29, 2019, a technical error prevented roughly half of them from recording, including most inside the SHU.

    The system was scheduled for repairs on August 9, the night before Epstein was found dead. But the technician assigned to fix it couldn’t access the necessary equipment because the corrections officer required to escort him was nearing the end of their shift.

    As a result, only two cameras were operational near the SHU at the time MCC staff found Epstein hanging in his cell: one covering the common area and stairwells near the entrance to the adjacent 10 South Unit, and another monitoring a ninth-floor elevator bay. Neither captured Epstein’s cell door.

    According to the DOJ’s memo, the footage confirms that from the time Epstein was locked in his cell at approximately 8 pm on August 9, 2019, and between around 10:40 pm and 6:30 am the next morning, no one entered the tier where his cell was located. However, the recording includes a notable gap: Approximately one minute of footage is missing, from 11:58:58 pm to 12:00:00 am. The video resumes immediately afterward.

    The OIG’s report found no evidence of a conspiracy to kill Epstein. Instead, it documented years of chronic staffing failures and system breakdowns at MCC. The facility was temporarily closed in 2021 after the DOJ essentially deemed conditions unfit for incarceration.

    At a press conference on Tuesday, Bondi attributed the missing minute to a flaw in the surveillance system’s daily cycle, claiming that one minute is missing from every night’s recording.

    Given the years of high-profile conspiracy theories surrounding Epstein, any perceived inconsistency in the official narrative is likely to draw intense scrutiny. Conspiracy theorist Alex Jones called the DOJ memo “sickening.” “Next the DOJ will say, ‘Actually, Jeffrey Epstein never even existed,’” he wrote in a post on X.

    “In the world of conspiracy theories, evidence that disproves something happened becomes proof that something happened,” says Rothschild. He explains that the case of Epstein's death is a good example of this phenomenon. “Every piece of evidence that points to him taking his own life—the negligence of the prison staff, the disrepair of the cameras, the coroner's report—is turned into evidence that he was killed by powerful figures who weren't competent enough to cover up the crime correctly.”

    The apparent gaps in the video, Rothschild says, will naturally inflame these suspicions.

    One media forensics expert, who reviewed the metadata and agreed with WIRED’s analysis but requested anonymity due to privacy concerns and a desire to avoid having their name publicly associated with anything related to the Epstein case, put it bluntly: “It looks suspicious—but not as suspicious as the DOJ refusing to answer basic questions about it.”

  • source
  • [–] 25 points 1 year ago (4 children)

    They literally said they color corrected and enhanced parts of it for visibility. So yes, the footage was modified.

  • source
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 47 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    But why? News agencies can do that if they wish, for the viewers, but why would a government agency releasing video evidence touch it up in any way? That's just asking for questions.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 29 points 1 year ago

    I would assume it's to make the metadata seem more reasonable, so people pay less attention to the cut. 'The "perfectly innocent" act of "touching it up" is the reason the metadata says what it does, not because we removed part of it. Don't look any closer!'

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

    The article mentions that. They supposedly released 2 versions, one "enhanced" to help make the relevant parts of the image easier to see, which certainly matches the description of "modified" and the other, the same footage but described as "raw" implying that it wasn't "modified" in that way.

    There are a lot of plausible and likely explanations for the Adobe metadata schema information that is in the file that don't involve deceptively manipulating footage to hide something that was in that footage before public presentation, then again, given the circumstances and supposed rationale behind publicly presenting this footage, failing to release it with untouched unmodified metadata from the camera original source files is not a good look. Failing to then answer questions about that makes it look even worse. This is is especially true when, although there is no answer they could give that would actually totally convince everyone, there are as I said many plausible explanations they could have offered and yet they were just silent.

    Ironically, as is so often the case with anything like this, depending on the interpretive lens you're using this issue with the metadata helps confirm either assertion, that there was cover up and Epstein was murdered, or that there was no such cover up and he really did kill himself. Obviously, the fact that it's modified lends credence to the idea they're hiding something because one might expect that if they weren't it'd be easy to just supply the footage with metadata more reflective of a surveillance system than Adobe software. However one could also say that, modifying metadata in a way that is undetectable should actually be relatively easy and the fact that they couldn't be bothered to do that, or didn't know how, or never thought of metadata being present in the first place could suggest it's not deceptive skullduggery so much as technical incompetence and sloppiness - too sloppy for competent conspiracists. On the other hand, they could also be sloppy and incompetent conspiracists who just did an awful job. That's not altogether unlikely either since the entire supposed suicide they potentially conspired to have people believe is a very suspicious cover story to begin with so not exactly an expertly conceived plan, more improvisational and done in a hurry which would kind of track with them botching later actions to take the heat off.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 7 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    I'm not surprised, and I'd still say it's not an unlikely grand conspiracy if some rich guy paid a couple guards to kill him.

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    Americans talk about conspiracy as if its something that only happens in literature. Of all places

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • Americans tend to overuse conspiracy to mythologize so they can support theirvmasdive cognitive dissonance and/or feel like there's a daddy in control of everything up to and apparentlybincluding the weather. Except tor the handful who are fucking sick if that shit and so used to dismissingbit out of hand.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 7 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    Meanwhile in other “No S—t! News” yada yada yada.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 4 points 1 year ago

    A bad thing in my country is the amount of Tesla’s we buy. In America it’s ICE, fascism and the government protecting the rich, powerful pedophiles from being exposed.

  • source
  • [–] 6 points 1 year ago*

    may further fuel conspiracy theories.... LOL
    There is already a substantial part of the world that believes the wild conspiracy theory that Epstein killed himself.

  • source
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago
    [–] 8 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    This isn't a problem, as it is well known that Adobe Premiere is not designed to modify video.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • 10 comments in c/usa@midwest.social view that post
    [–] 26 points 1 year ago (6 children)

    You have to be kidding me... It's like they're not even trying

  • source
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 6 points 1 year ago (4 children)

    I mean, they have been purging everyone who doesn’t ideologically align with them in a full-throated fashion from as many government agencies as they possibly can. And dogmatic sycophants tend to not be the sharpest crayons in the box.

    Which is to say: I’m not shocked that they’re having a comical level of very basic SNAFUs on a regular basis, given the intellectual caliber of the staff the current regime is selecting for.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 1 year ago (3 children)

    I mean, that's certainly true... But like, we told them the test answers. They let slip in an interview they just had to "clean up" the video, and reporters were like "what the fuck does that mean?". So then they said they'd also release the unedited video alongside the "cleaned up" one, and reporters would not let that go

    I mean, I know they're dumb, but come on... I just can't fathom this level of incompetence. They literally started a coverup, made out this video to be proof to get everyone to calm down, and what? Realized the video actually looked sketchy and doctored it?

    Plus the video itself is super sketch - a guard walks in with a bag, leaves it inside, a hooded figure comes in and leaves, and then he's found dead... What???

    I thought Epstein was just coerced into killing himself, because of the video now I think he was straight up assassinated

    My brain can't comprehend such a chain of unforced errors

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    It’s a Dunning-Kruger regime. They all think they’re the smartest guy in the room, but they’re pretty much all just complete fucking idiots.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    But like... I've seen dogs lie better than that

    I can't wrap my head around this. I can't imagine this level of stupidity, i just don't understand

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 3 points 1 year ago

    "We know that they are lying, they know that they are lying, they even know that we know they are lying, we also know that they know we know they are lying too, they of course know that we certainly know they know we know they are lying too as well, but they are still lying. In our country, the lie has become not just moral category, but the pillar industry of this country."

    Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 8 points 1 year ago

    What a bunch of donkeys.

  • source
  • [–] 6 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    It’s both comforting and discouraging that they’re so inept.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 4 points 1 year ago

    Yeah. You’ve got people talking about quitting the DOJ because they’re used to the old world where people get in trouble for things. And then up on top there’s Donald Trump saying “RAPE IS THE BEST AND LET’S KILL ALL THE MEXICANS” and getting away with it.

    I think it just doesn’t matter anymore. The video is fake and it’s going to be fine. I think the hope is that things will change and it’ll matter again in time for things to come back around and whiplash these specific people.

  • source
  • parent
  • 4 comments in c/world view that post
    [–] 24 points 1 year ago

    Your government has been lying to you for the last DECADE and NOW you want to believe???

  • source
  • [–] 16 points 1 year ago

    Fingers crossed this somehow breaks up the cult. No idea why these lies hit different than all the other complete 180s.

  • source
  • [–] 9 points 1 year ago

    Farid points to another anomaly: The video’s aspect ratio shifts noticeably at several points. “Why am I suddenly seeing a different aspect ratio?” he asks.

    Because you’re cropping something out of the frame? Bill Barr in a hamburglar outfit carrying a garrote, for example.

  • source
  • [–] 4 points 1 year ago

    The line just below the headline throws a lot of cold water on the conspiracy angle:

    There is no evidence the footage was deceptively manipulated, but ambiguities around how the video was processed may further fuel conspiracy theories about Epstein’s death.

  • source