News
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious biased sources will be removed at the mods’ discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted separately but not to the post body. Sources may be checked for reliability using Wikipedia, MBFC, AdFontes, GroundNews, etc.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source. Clickbait titles may be removed.
Posts which titles don’t match the source may be removed. If the site changed their headline, we may ask you to update the post title. Clickbait titles use hyperbolic language and do not accurately describe the article content. When necessary, post titles may be edited, clearly marked with [brackets], but may never be used to editorialize or comment on the content.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials, videos, press releases, or celebrity gossip will be allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis. Mods may use discretion to pre-approve videos or press releases from highly credible sources that provide unique, newsworthy content not available or possible in another format.
7. No duplicate posts.
If an article has already been posted, it will be removed. Different articles reporting on the same subject are permitted. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners or news aggregators.
All posts must link to original article sources. You may include archival links in the post description. News aggregators such as Yahoo, Google, Hacker News, etc. should be avoided in favor of the original source link. Newswire services such as AP, Reuters, or AFP, are frequently republished and may be shared from other credible sources.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
view the rest of the comments
The metadata says otherwise.
I personally am not going to take the word of Pam Bondi and some anonymous government insiders on this one.
If the footage wasn't edited than this complete footage can also be independently verified by digital forensics. Until then there's no evidence to back up this claim.
Right now all we have is an unverified claim by CBS (Capitulation Broadcasting Systems) that just so happens to corroborate a Trump spokesman.
Couldn’t even read the short summary…
Dead link? Not sure what you mean there. Here's the important parts of the link I provided.
Here's the relevant part of the summary that they're saying you didn't read.
And you are trusting blindly.
I've provided evidence. You're giving me pam bondis trust me bro.
No, this whole thread is about you jumping to conclusions and talking about the wrong video. Nobody here is supporting Pam Bondi or her claims/lies. We're just questioning your reading comprehension skills.
Stop trying to "win" for 8 seconds and read the damn sentence. Nobody is supporting Bondi. Nobody is trusting anything blindly. You're railing against something that wasn't even claimed by Bondi or anyone else.
They are so completely incapable of admitting that they did not read the article or OP's summary before posting.
"they" in this sentence is not Pam Bondi.
(well, presumably. That would be a hell of a twist)
Oh I see. You're accusing me of not reading it when I'm simply not convinced.
Welp Pam bondi saying "there's always a missing minute" doesn't really factor when the video is spliced together and demonstrably so.
They are accusing you of not reading the article OP posted, or even the two sentence summary OP included in their post body.
Oh well I did. Sounds like you guys didn't really apply any critical thinking to what you read though.
Pam Bondi: "Trust me bro"
Me: "Lmao no"
You: "RAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAGE"
The article OP posted is about a government source that supports your stance.
I have absolutely no clue how you have concluded from anything I've said in this thread (or anywhere, frankly) that I trust anything Bondi says.
Dude lol. You cannot be this stupid
Lmfao this freak got so mad he downvoted every comment I’ve ever made. Psychotic
Right, that's exactly what this government source is saying. They're a whistleblower confirming that the video that was released was edited because the government has the original video that includes the missing footage
Lol downvoting me because you didn't read.
Well when that footage is released and independently verified than we'll have something to talk about.
Considering CBS just capitulated to Trump I'm not going to trust their anonymous sources. Especially if they're corroborating any Trump spokesman.
Lol okie dokie
So even though the footage previously release has been verified to be edited... you're just gonna believe that this allegedly complete footage exists... based on a CBS article with zero citations?
https://www.wired.com/story/the-fbis-jeffrey-epstein-prison-video-had-nearly-3-minutes-cut-out/
You're completely misunderstanding. The CBS source is confirming the non-edited version exists.
I think this person is not misunderstanding at this point but using a very bizarre and unsuccessful strategy to attempt to save face after being correctly called out for not reading the article lol
EDIT: LOL they've gone through my comment history and downvoted all of my comments...
Yeah, I read further down after posting that. Whooo boy.
It had to be edited from something...?
Huh?? This does not corroborate a Trump spokesman, it's literally the opposite. Can you explain what made you think it corroborates a Trump spokesman?
The first analysis that I saw clocked the actual missing time as roughly 2:50 if I recall correctly, and this was when news first hit about there being a 'magic minute' when the system turns over during the AM hours. This is pretty typical for the FBI, not just lying, but doing a poor job of it and telling everyone who balks at their shit excuses to get fucked instead of furnishing actual credible evidence.
Even if it's true that the recording software's clock always skips a minute at midnight... the footage wouldn't be split up at that point.
There's literally no reason for that footage to have been spliced the number of times that the metadata shows it was.
They could prove themselves by simply releasing the raw footage without the edits. Wonder why they don't.
Bingo, it was a poor excuse for a poorly implemented security system (in a fucking prison of all places), and turned out to only serve as further obfuscation for additional problems with their story.
I've re-read the original article like 30 times now.
It's bonkers to me that people are so quick to trust this unverified claim the complete footage (without Epstein getting murdered) exists when the footage already released has been proven to be doctored.
Like if this is legit than the footage needs to be released and verified by 3rd parties.