June 24, 2025

FAKE NEWS FAIL: CNN Exposed for Bad Iran Strike Reporting.

That’s the same Natasha Bertrand who “exposed” the Hunter Biden laptop “Russian disinformation” story, which was, like the CNN piece here, fake news. CNN claims:

The US military strikes on three of Iran’s nuclear facilities last weekend did not destroy the core components of the country’s nuclear program and likely only set it back by months, according to an early US intelligence assessment that was described by four people briefed on it.

The four people are not named, of course. One wonders if they’re the same leakers who broke the “Hunter’s laptop is Russian disinformation” story to CNN, to this same reporter. Sometimes, coincidences are just coincidences — but here?

Brit Hume adds: “That CNN report on this left out the part about this intelligence report being considered ‘low confidence.’ Imagine that.”

At his Substack, Erick Erickson writes, “What do you think is more likely? The attack did not set back Iran or anti-Trump bureaucrats are trying to make a successful attack look bad to discredit the President and the military.”

Joe Concha quips, “Surprised CNN just didn’t go with 51 intelligence officers for old times sake…”

Heh, indeed — 0r maybe 57 for a nice Manchurian Candidate callback:

Related: UN Nuclear Watchdog Chief: ‘Night and Day’ Difference Between Iran’s Nuclear Capabilities Before and After US Strikes. ‘It is clear that there is one Iran—before June 13, nuclear Iran—and one now,’ says IAEA’s Rafael Grossi.

UPDATE: This is CNN:

MORE: Pooh-Poohing the Iran Bombing.

All right, let’s talk about the leaked intel assessment on the bombing of Iran’s nuclear sites. CNN reported one US intelligence assessment concluded that Iran’s nuclear program has only been set back a few months. The New York Times soon followed with a nearly identical piece.

There are no specifics in either piece. We don’t know—and we it’s clear the reporters do not know—which sites they are relaying quotes about. And there’s a strange, or maybe not so strange, unwillingness to note that the assessment in question, from the Defense Intelligence Agency, was made with “low confidence”—which is code for “we don’t really know what happened so we’re going to guess, kind of.”

But here is one assertion in the Times report: “The strikes badly damaged the electrical system at Fordo, which is housed deep inside a mountain to shield it from attacks, officials said. It is not clear how long it will take Iran to gain access to the underground buildings and then repair the electrical systems and reinstall equipment that was moved.”

If the Times is reporting that detail accurately, then Fordow is done for. The power sources are down and no one can get inside the facility. So it is accurate to say the site was not completely destroyed physically, but that doesn’t mean it is functional or operational. The facility is hundreds of meters deep. Among other things, there’s no air in there.

Exit quote: “Iran’s pursuit of nuclear weapons has been made more dangerous for them, vastly more expensive, and more difficult by significant margins. And any progress at all will have to evade Israel’s watchful eye.”

But have we heard from Joe Scarborough on how things are going at Fordow?

Posted at 9:14 pm by Ed Driscoll