CNN Iran strike report shows leakers manipulate media against Trump

In the hours after the U.S. strike on Iran’s Fardow nuclear facility, CNN’s Natasha Bertrand got the spoon of what was once a lifetime, and a leaked report showed that it caused little damage. But it turns out that now it is almost certain that Bertrand and CNN are manipulated by political actors.

In the days since then, the IAEA, the Israeli government, the CIA to President Trump himself have assessed that it has suffered much more than the initial “low confidence” report.

Trump follows CNN, New York Times is “fake news” about strikes in Iran’s nuclear facility

The incident highlights a serious problem in journalism: the instant credibility provided by free media to any leaker, information that is harmful to President Trump is misleading American citizens.

We all owe the debts of the leaker, who selflessly and selflessly reveal important information hidden by the government. But, for partisan reasons, are leakers who peddled selective information just for the damage to the president? That’s a completely different species. Journalists must be able to spot differences in order to put good public information in appropriate circumstances.

Traditionally, journalists have high trust in leakers because they are said to have revealed the truth in ways that hurt themselves. This is similar to the legal concept that acknowledging one’s own interest leads to greater weight.

But in today’s political and media environment, leakers are almost never caught and punished. For example, we still don’t know who leaked the Supreme Court’s DOBBS ruling, so these leakers, these insiders, have learned to play the system.

This time, the Trump administration must focus on finding and punishing the Furdo leaker. Doing so can quickly and significantly improve U.S. journalism.

Bertrand allegedly spoke to seven people about her story to minimize damage to Iran’s nuclear program, and did she ask herself why these deep states want to let the half-mature stories flow? Because, it is almost certainly not a pure patriotic obligation.

If President Trump has proven that the damage to Faudo is indeed, and the leaker is in danger, just to let the United States and the world know that Iran is still waving an imminent nuclear threat, it may be an act of justice. But the leaked report was already on the rise before a full review was conducted and full of warning language. This report is far inferior to the eyes. It doesn’t matter whether it’s the leaker or Bertrand himself that hiding this important background is not important. The media places such information in the right angle depends on the media.

Arlington, Va. – June 22: U.S. Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth (L) chairs the joint meeting of the General Staff Chairman Dan Caine at a press conference at the Pentagon on June 22, 2025. U.S. President Donald Trump spoke to the country last night after three Iranian nuclear facilities were attacked by U.S. troops. (Photo taken by Andrew Harnik/Getty Images) (Getty Image)

Someone on CNN said, “Hey, you know, there might be a political agenda behind this, we might not get the full story?” Surely it doesn’t look like it.

CNN claims they said from the outset that the report had low confidence, but the Media Research Center had receipts. Bertrand’s first report did not say “low confidence.” Her trusted source missed this part, or her omission was lying.

In the days that followed, CNN was associated with the story, with each show carrying a blockbuster leak, which proved to be politically motivated nonsense.

Dear readers, I regret to inform you that CNN and its products of the same kind will not change or reform. In this case, the Trump administration can sue everything they want because it threatens to take action against CNN and the New York Times, but that’s not the answer.

When it comes to anti-Trump stories, CNN is like heroin addicts, these deep state leakers are their connections, and in the long run, infinite short-term happiness is fixed, thus crimping the network’s credibility.

The answer is to punish the leaker. The answer is to return to the original deal, which is, we will take your leak seriously as you risk revealing the prison. Without a part of the prison, the whole concept falls into pieces. Leaks can simply be politically popular without fingerprints.

Whoever is the hateful person, who leaked the report, has damaged Trump’s ability to negotiate with Iran and may put the methods and sources of intelligence in danger by citing signal intelligence.

For these reasons alone, leakers of knowledge and trust need to be punished. White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt said this week that “should be jailed.”

When it comes to anti-Trump stories, CNN is like heroin addicts, these deep state leakers are their connections, and in the long run, infinite short-term happiness is fixed, thus crimping the network’s credibility.

This is not enough to punish the addict. We must punish dealers who peddled half-truth to undermine the U.S. president.

Click here for more Fox News comments

In short, it’s time to sort the secret information again. To end the game of playing Footsie’s deep state officials with free media, we need Natasha Bertrand to start listening to her source: “Sorry, I’m not going to jail for this.”

Donald Trump ran twice and won two victories, promising to drain the swamp to make the DC bureaucracy more efficient and effective. When will the goal of this effort last until the news media undermines his administration?

Click here to get the Fox News app

This time, the leaker must make a clear statement that if you break the law, you are going to go to jail, you hate Donald Trump or how righteous you think hatred is.

Once understood, perhaps, perhaps, the deep state of the false information pipeline of fake news can be destroyed once and for all.

Click here to learn more about David Marcus