CNN has been in full cover up mode trying to diffuse the criticism for their 'intelligence leak' on the effects of the Iran bombing. Most people don't have 24 hours a day to watch the station and keep track of what they said and what they didn't say. Thankfully, Nicholas Fondacaro was kind enough to compile it and put it in a tweet thread. Spread it wide and far.
WATCH CNN LIE
— Nicholas Fondacaro (@NickFondacaro) June 26, 2025
CNN "journalists" parrot each other as they falsely claim Natasha Bertrand's initial reporting the Iran strike leak included the facts that it was a "low confidence" and "preliminary" report.
Kate Bolduan proclaims: "...about it being low confidence. CNN reported on… pic.twitter.com/aKDMF4CXs1
Using the Wayback Machine, you can see that the initial report pushed by Bertrand on Tuesday does not have the words "low confidence" nor "preliminary."
— Nicholas Fondacaro (@NickFondacaro) June 26, 2025
The only times the word "low" is even used was White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt telling CNN the leak came from "an…
They conveniently forget the internet is forever.
Those words don't appear in any version of the article until Wednesday afternoon when they quote Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth's criticisms of the assessment: "Hegseth, who is also at the NATO summit, said Wednesday the assessment was 'a top secret report; it was preliminary; it…
— Nicholas Fondacaro (@NickFondacaro) June 26, 2025
So, the first time it is mentioned is when Secretary Hegseth pushes back. Not before then.
Here's Bertrand's initial appearance on CNN to push her story.
— Nicholas Fondacaro (@NickFondacaro) June 26, 2025
Again, nowhere does she use the words "low confidence" or "preliminary."
In fact, she implies just the opposite, proclaiming with confidence:
"And so it appears that while these bombs did in fact inflict significant… pic.twitter.com/7bUIYxdMAt
This initial on-air report from Bertrand happened on Tuesday afternoon
— Nicholas Fondacaro (@NickFondacaro) June 26, 2025
Oof! That's going to leave a mark.
Proof @CNN is lying that they said strike assessment was 'low confidence' https://t.co/5ckLAWS7dL
— Nicholas Fondacaro (@NickFondacaro) June 26, 2025
Listen closely. You'll never hear that caveat.
And if CNN tries to edit out Bertrand from their in-house transcripts page, I have it saved on the Wayback Machine:https://t.co/ej7dZvabqE
— Nicholas Fondacaro (@NickFondacaro) June 26, 2025
Nicholas has those receipts on lock down.
@CNN CNN lost credibility years ago, no matter how much they get pissed off that the American public doesn't trust them, until they can look in the mirror and answer to themselves why they'll keep f****** up
— ANJI USA PASSION🇺🇲🙏😘 (@usa_anji) June 26, 2025
The easy answer as to why they keep messing up is they are constantly focused on undermining Trump and they can't find anything significant to criticize.
That's a very cute sleight of hand.
— Bonchie (@bonchieredstate) June 26, 2025
She goes from saying they reported it was "low confidence" (they didn't) to claiming that the use of the term "preliminary" was sufficient to communicate that (it wasn't).
It'd be too much for them to just admit they misled people. https://t.co/vbWsv69kVH
They are hoping viewers aren't paying attention.
I watched a bunch of @CNN that day, and don't recall them ever saying it was low confidence. https://t.co/NIIfObMKnd
— Pradheep J. Shanker, M.D. (@neoavatara) June 26, 2025
The GOP has made a critical change dealing with the media and Trump deserves a lot of credit for that change. No more whining about “hypocrisy” or “bias.” That does nothing.
— Jesse Kelly (@JesseKellyDC) June 26, 2025
Call them evil, stupid liars to their faces and put them on the defense.
Treat your enemy like an enemy. https://t.co/5TzAvJVHbo
Treat them like an enemy and prove them wrong at every turn.