Yesterday, CNN, the nation’s trusted source in news, ran a story that claimed that Donald Trump, Jr. had received an email giving him the decryption key to the Wikileaks stash of Colin Powell on September 4, 2016, nine days before they became public on September 13. This supposedly showed that Donald Trump, Jr., was, to use the current vernacular, “colluding” with Wikileaks and because everyone simply knows that Wikileaks is run by the Russians, Trump, Jr. was, therefore, colluding with the Russians.

In short order, this major, or so it was claimed, scoop became like Dead Sea fruit in the mouth of CNN as it was revealed to be a fraud. The problem was that no one at CNN had seen the email, it had been described to them by “sources,” and the sources somehow changed the date, either by accident or not.

First out of the gate we have the “update.” In a more genteel age, when a newspaper published something that was proven to be untrue they issued a retraction but that isn’t how CNN rolls. This is the lead reporter on the story:

Then we have the “we did our damndest” apologia from corporate communications:

Then you have this from Brian Stetler who has permanent job security in whitewashing CNN’s f**k-ups

Let’s be clear on this. This is EXACTLY the same fact-set that got Brian Ross suspended. He got bad information and ran with it. CNN, however, tells us something very interesting. Their editorial guidelines permit reporting on documents their reporters don’t even know exist. As Ron White would say, that’s a handy little piece of information to have.

Glenn Greenwald, who is definitely not a convervative of any stripe, made a series of very good observations:

At this point you are left with an irresolvable conflict. If the information came from multiple sources, how did they make the same error? Were there multiple sources, or did the CNN reporting team just lie about it? Was CNN deliberately burned to put this story into play? If they were burned, they have to know who burned them and why won’t they out the sources because that would be newsworthy in its own right. I mean, what motive would people have for feeding the Piltdown Man of political stories to CNN?

And it does seem like a bit of a coincidence that the big pusher of the story was California Democrat Ted Lieu and has appointed himself to be Trump’s nemesis.

CNN is trying to make this story go away and they will undoubtedly succeed. But it seems pretty obvious at this point that CNN was targeted by Democrat staffers for an information operation that was worthy of something the KGB would have pulled on a newspaper in Sub-Saharan Africa because CNN seems to have the editorial controls one would expect to find there.