Asmongold TV - They had one job.. | Asmongold TV

Episode Date: July 12, 2025

They had one job.. Asmongold show for all of his stream highlights, competitions, reactions & more. ---------- Keywords: esports commentary, gaming reactions, gaming podcast, twitch streamer Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

So DOJ released footage Epstein was edited with Adobe Premiere Pro and stitched from two clips. The raw Epstein footage was modified according to its metadata, despite Dan Bongino previously saying that they would release the original footage, so you wouldn't think there were shenanigans. There's video. We are working on cleaning it up to make sure you have an enhanced. And we're going to give the original so you don't think there were any shenanigans. Well, unfortunately, that's not what we got.

Even the raw video, the original video, was put into Adobe Premiere Pro. This is a scoop from Wired, quote, metadata shows the FBI's raw Jeffrey Epstein prison video was likely modified. And basically, they pulled the metadata and showed that the footage appears to be 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, which technically it is not. Now, I pulled the XIF data myself. This is what it looks like. You can see that there's these ingredients file path here

where you can see four different files. Two of them are just identical. So two unique files here. I don't accept this if it was to compress the file? Well, here's the reality is that a lot of these things do, they can sometimes make sense because the file type would not be something that they can upload and they are re-uploading it in a better file type

or with a different type of resolution. And so like there are, yeah, raw data is huge. Yeah, exactly. So like there are, there are reasons for that. But yeah, again, it's another point on the graph. Exactly. Stitch together is the most charitable interpretation. But look, the stunning incompetence,

if that's what this is, is kind of hard to take. Just over and over, they sort of hype up what they have. then deliver something different in a meaningful way. You cannot say, hey, we're going to give you original footage so you don't think there are shenanigans and then you splice together two clips in Premier Prol. I mean, yes, maybe you didn't do anything with it, but it kind of ruins the whole chain of evidence. Wired actually quotes a professor of UC Berkeley whose research focuses on digital forensics.

He has testified in numerous court cases and he says, if a lawyer brought me this file and asks if it was suitable for court, I'd say no, go back to the source, do it right. Do a direct export from the original system, no monkey business. So that kind of puts it all together. I mean, maybe, maybe this is all charitably just incompetence. Charitably, it was just. I think this is the problem. The problem is that there have been so many of these things that have happened at the same time

and in a row that it's very hard to say, that any of this was a coincidence when the coincidences just keep happening over and over and over and over. I mean, there's just too many fucking coincidences, man. Hey, there was a minute at night missing because it's an old

analog video system and there were two different files. They spliced it together. But even that is like, was done horribly in the worst possible way. For instance, the video aspect ratio suddenly shifts as the tape changes over or whatever they claim. You can see

that right here, there's like a sudden shift in the video. I have not changed this video in any way. I have it in the Premiere Pro timeline, which I guess they had as well. So this is as intended. So there's this just weird shifts in the footage. I mean, this was done in actually a very sloppy way after they explicitly talked about needing to do it in the right way. He's reaching. I think that all of these things can be explained. But here's the problem is that this is the third or fourth video he's made about this, how many coincidences are you going to have

that all align with the same outcome before you think to yourself, maybe that's the outcome? How's he reaching? Well, let me explain. So this is pretty common in like video editing

that they probably just resized it inside of Adobe Premiere Pro because they are putting all the videos together because with multiple, in a lot of video software, like if you look at, for example, this says 1158 p.m. So oftentimes videos will cut at a certain period of time to create another file. Because obviously, like, you can't just make this infinitely long file. And so the file will stop at a certain point.

Like on Twitch, for example, if somebody's doing a 24-hour stream, like an ongoing sub-a-thon, you'll notice that their streams are 48 hours every single time. Here, I'll give you a direct example right now. So if I look at the Twitch tracker for my 24-7 channel, you'll see that a lot of my streams are exactly 48 hours. Why are all of my streams 48 hours? Well, it's because that's the amount of time that somebody can actually go and watch the, and it can hold data for it.

But would the aspect ratio change? Yes, it would. And let me explain why. It's because they could have done a bad job with it. So, for example, they're taking the aspect ratio and you can see these black bars. The aspect ratio does not match the editing area for the window that they're editing the video in. So basically they're putting the video, if I can explain it like this,

because I've done video editing, I know how this works. You take a video and it's like an old World of Warcraft video and it's four by three. So you take this video and you put it in there and it looks like this. But then you have a second video that you're putting in as well, and then the second video is like this. Because you resize the original file incorrectly because you did a bad job. As a video editor, Zach is right? Yes, I've edited videos. I know this.

Now, every system is different, and I don't know how this system works, and maybe in this system, this problem isn't relevant. They're hiding something. Here's the problem. all I'm, you guys, when you're a hammer, every problem looks like a nail. You don't have to be a hammer. You have to look at data and you should always apply what I believe to be the null hypothesis of the scientific method. You assume that what you believe is not true and you work backwards to find out that it is true. You think of plausible deniability.

You think of other reasons why things could occur. and that helps you arrive at the truth more effectively than beginning at your answer. But the footage is not raw. The footage is not raw. It is not raw, almost guaranteed. Well, by definition, it's not raw because it was taken through Adobe Premiere. If it was raw, it would be the direct file from the video. So this is as intended.

So there's this just weird shifts in the footage. I mean, this was. done in actually a very sloppy way after they explicitly talked about needing to do it in the right way so the American public could rely on it. I'm not going to withhold information from the American public ever, but I'm also not going to rush to get it out there in a format in which they can't rely on it. Except that's exactly what they did. The promises that were made are just consistently not kept.

When you go on Fox News and say, you're going to do. do it right. You're going to give us the original video so we don't think there are shenanigans. And then you do this. Yes, we can interpret you charitably, but it leaves room for doubt. It's not only the case. It does leave room for doubt. And again, the problem is that there are so many, and this goes back to what I said, there are so many other points on the graph. And every single point on the graph points to this being a conspiracy and a cover up. There is nothing logical about assuming that none of this was a cover-up and this happened completely organically.

No logical person could come to the conclusion that all these things just happened to happen simultaneously and it was like some weird stars aligning everybody seemed, it's like some kind of like Rube Goldberg machine that makes Jeffrey Epstein the only person. Like it's bullshit.

Total bullshit. That at 1158 p.m., the aspect ratio changes It's also the case that the enhanced version and the raw version also differ from each other in how the aspect ratio changes. You can see that originally the enhanced and the regular raw version line up perfectly in terms of aspect ratio. But when the camera flips over to this new day, now their aspect ratio is actually off from each other. Exactly. And you can see how it's probably because the new day signified a new recording. and the new recording was then resized wrongly.

That's what I think happened. I actually don't think this is a smoking gun. So why? I mean, this is like so obviously bad. They said they were taking their time with this. They said, oh, we're not no shenanigans here. But this wasn't a complicated job. It was just about like they did mild sharpening and contrast boosting.

Why they're playing around with the aspect ratio. like they're a film director in their first year of film school is unimaginable to me. I just like cannot understand. And coffee's right about this too. Is that how the fuck do you not get this right? Like I got this right in 2008 whenever I made videos and Windows movie maker. This is the FBI communicating information to the national public and you're fucking it up. Why you would be doing this in such a sloppy way?

So just incredibly incompetent work here is the nicest way to say it. Yeah. We know now that it's incompetent at absolute best. Epstein footage that they have released to us. Even the Rov footage was modified. Last thing I want to say is that it's the final day of crime is legal merch. 10% off at the link below now. Yep, there it is.

And you remind us all we are. Yeah, there has to be some sort of diversion. whoever's responsible is corrupt and they have funding. Yeah, I don't know. If Trump's first word of business was to fire all the competent people in government. Well, I don't know. I mean, I feel like they weren't there to begin with, to be honest. But yeah, I don't know.

Would you want a resignation over this? I think that the person who is, I mean, yeah, yeah, actually, yeah. In a way, I think I would want a resignation over this. And the reason why is because of how mismanaged it is. That's the reason why. Like even if all of this is true and they're telling the truth, they've mismanaged. Check the Trump tweet.

It's about this. Okay, let me see what he said. Oh, let me link you coffee's video too. Like, I've been watching a number of his videos on this Epstein stuff, and I'm really glad to see him bringing this up and talking about it. Give him some support. I completely agree with covering this and caring about this. It's unbelievable.

They believe people are idiots and wouldn't notice this. It's not just noticing one thing. It's noticing 20 things that all lead to the same conclusion. If the only thing that was wrong is, oh, the aspect ratio is different, I would go and say, yeah, well, they probably just edited it wrong or they fucked up the aspect ratio in post-production. Sure, mistakes happen. But the problem is that how is it the mistakes that always happen seem to be in the benefit of one thing? I've always said that when coincidence and personal interest converge, in a lot of

cases, it's not a coincidence. And I think this is a great example of that.