Three CNN Employees 'Resign' Over 'Russia Collusion' Fake News Retraction

A few days ago we noted that CNN was forced to retract one of their bombshell 'Russian collusion' stories when it was apparently revealed that the whole thing was nothing more than their latest, anonymously-sourced fake news debacle.  Like most CNN stories on the topic, this one carried a salacious title ("Congress was investigating a Russian investment fund with ties to Trump officials") which implied some nefarious plot by the Trump administration to stage a coup in the United States. 

Within 36 hours, however, CNN was forced to retract the story and issue an apology to Anthony Scaramucci (presumably for the whole libel thing).

That story did not meet CNN's editorial standards and has been retracted. Links to the story have been disabled. CNN apologizes to Mr. Scaramucci.

Now, according to a new report from the Washington Post, the fake story has resulted in the 'resignation' of three CNN 'journalists, including the Pulitzer Prize winner, Thomas Frank

Now for the consequences. CNN announced on Monday afternoon that three network officials are leaving their jobs over the incident: Frank, the reporter on the story; Eric Lichtblau, a recent CNN addition from the New York Times who edited the piece; and Lex Haris, the executive editor of “CNN Investigates.” The moves follow an investigation carried out by CNN executives over the weekend, with the conclusion that longstanding network procedures for publishing stories weren’t properly followed. “There was a significant breakdown in process,” says a CNN source. “There were editorial checks and balances within the organization that weren’t met.”

 

The official CNN statement: “In the aftermath of the retraction of a story published on CNN.com, CNN has accepted the resignations of the employees involved in the story’s publication.”

 

Regarding the personnel changes, a CNN source said, “The individuals all stated that they accepted responsibility and wanted to resign.” A compelling wrinkle in the saga of the story springs from the careful language in the editor’s note: “That story did not meet CNN’s editorial standards and has been retracted. Links to the story have been disabled. CNN apologizes to Mr. Scaramucci,” it reads. CNN is not bailing on all the factual representations in the story, however. “We pulled it down not because we disproved it,” says a CNN source, adding that there was “enough concern” on some factual points that “given the breach in process, we decided to pull it down.”

Of course, this is hardly the first time CNN has been caught reporting fake news recently (see "Looks Like CNN's Anonymous Sources Got This One Wrong") and we doubt it will be the last.

* * *

For those who missed it, our original post on the retraction is below:

Thursday afternoon, CNN posted a story, by none other than Pulitzer-Prize-winning reporter Thomas Frank, claiming that "Congress was investigating a Russian investment fund with ties to Trump officials."

The story was perfect fodder for 'The Left' as it provided yet more 'confirmation' that sources 'confirmed' Trump and his team were up to something nefarious with The Russians...

Highlights included...

Congress is investigating a little-known Russian investment fund...

 

The fund CEO met in January with a member of the Trump transition team...

 

"If you're going to get your nose under the tent, that's a good place to start," said Ludema, a Georgetown University economics professor. "I'm sure their objective is to get rid of all the sanctions against the financial institutions. But RDIF is one [sanctioned organizations] where a number of prominent U.S. investors have been involved."

 

A fund spokeswoman says there was no discussion about lifting sanctions...

 

Scaramucci's comments alarmed Democratic Senators Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts and Ben Cardin of Maryland, who asked Mnuchin investigate whether Scaramucci sought to "facilitate prohibited transactions" or promised to waive or lift sanctions against Russia.

Sounds great right? Well, despite the 'facts' they reported, 36 hours later (quietly late on a Friday night), CNN decided to delete the story and issue a retraction, apologizing to Mr. Scaramucci (presumably for lying?)

On June 22, 2017, CNN.com published a story connecting Anthony Scaramucci with investigations into the Russian Direct Investment Fund.

 

That story did not meet CNN's editorial standards and has been retracted. Links to the story have been disabled. CNN apologizes to Mr. Scaramucci.

 

Mr. Scaramucci responded via Twitter...

Despite their deletion of the story, thanks to The Wayback-Machine, we can see what the original story said...

 

Is it any wonder that Americans are becoming increasingly frustrated by the media's attention to the 'Russia' narrative that is is constantly spewed with no mind for factual reporting?

Comments

nmewn johngaltfla Mon, 06/26/2017 - 20:25 Permalink

"Between this story, the SCOTUS today..."A unanimous SCOTUS decision I might add. Even the socialist-globalists on the court agree POTUS has the Constitutional authority. Its rare for an injunction to be lifted unanimously without the underlying premise that the litigant would in fact prevail on a full hearing, thats how slam dunk this was. Meaning, the progs substituting the word "Muslim" for "national" is a dead issue as far as they are concerned. It was never going to be close ;-)

In reply to by johngaltfla

OverTheHedge SomebodySpecial Tue, 06/27/2017 - 01:37 Permalink

Just insert the words "...were told that....", in front of each statement, and all is good:"Were told that they accepted responsibility", and "were told that they wanted to resign".The pressure to produce a TrumpRussia story must have been immense, coming from the top. We all know this.(Note my use of the word "story", which is technica journalisml jargon for"made up shit").

In reply to by SomebodySpecial

Creative_Destruct nmewn Mon, 06/26/2017 - 22:28 Permalink

"....unanimous SCOTUS decision I might add"Exactly... this indicates the executive order, for the most part at least, was constitutional ON ITS FACE, invalidating most of the lower court's "unconstitutional religious discrimination" rationale they read into the order's intent partly bassed on TRUMPS CAMPAIGN STATEMENTS... This CRAZY rationale could have set a precendent for invalidating laws and orders BASED ON CAMPAIGN  REHETORIC. Even the liberal justices on the court can see this is a dangerous precedent to set.What's more, the fact that the lower courts actually stayed the order based on this foolish logic exposes their bias. Again, by accident or design, Trump is forcing th leftist-statist-globalist contingent to exposed themselves and discredit themselves. 

In reply to by nmewn

goober nmewn Tue, 06/27/2017 - 15:47 Permalink

Yes another example of the many illusions we all live under and how easily they are created for consumption by the masses. Many states and cities went along with this bogus 9th circuit ruling as if to give their bogus claims credence ? It gets more distorted with each event. The only good news is these morons are exposing themselves to be morons as their false paradigms and narratives are failing daily.Serious vetting is an absolute necessity and in no way a negative to anybody. Gotta wonder when 9th circuit will be held responsible for all their bad decisions and overturns ? wasting all manner of dollars and other courts time far too many times. This seriously questions their validity for many reasons and has become a valid question. Are they an actual court of jurisprudence or a political organization ? And the 5th as well.

In reply to by nmewn

azusgm Croesus Mon, 06/26/2017 - 22:43 Permalink

Lee Stranahan today pointed out that CNN doesn't mind knowingly engaging in false reporting. They did it before. After accurately reporting that Ansar al Sharia conducted the attack on Benghazi, the killed their own reporting and took up the line about a stupid video that offended muslims and caused a violent backlash. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1pwZvZGQfbg&feature=shareDoes anyone really believe those three newsmen resigned as a matter of honor? Did they resign without better jobs waiting for them? Seriously?Trust me, they are being rewarded for being faithful soldiers. Probably already decorating their new and improved offices.

In reply to by Croesus

Giant Meteor azusgm Tue, 06/27/2017 - 00:09 Permalink

 CNN is not bailing on all the factual representations in the story, however. “We pulled it down not because we disproved it,” says a CNN source, adding that there was “enough concern” on some factual points that “given the breach in process, we decided to pull it down.”Would certainly lend further credence to your point ...That is some, ahem, retraction ... 

In reply to by azusgm

nmewn Lumberjack Mon, 06/26/2017 - 20:44 Permalink

Thats the other thing I never bought into, this whole line of globalist-prog nonsense of..."We just need to understand them!"...bullshit. At first reading its patently condescending to whoever "they" are, meaning, "they" are not smart enough to understand us. Of course, me being me (lol) I really don't give a shit what "they" think of me anyways ;-)

In reply to by Lumberjack

zebra77a wee-weed up Tue, 06/27/2017 - 06:45 Permalink

CNN would be doting over their Trump witch hunting skills normally. To be firing them means they got the lawyers letters for slander from the Trump administration and there trying to firewall it. There about to be sued heavily and let it begin! Lets see how their exclusive coverage of the Trump administration suing CNN works out for them they will have an exclusive!

In reply to by wee-weed up

Snípéir_Ag_Obair HRClinton Mon, 06/26/2017 - 19:56 Permalink

presented without comment:

https://johndenugent.com/images/cnn-jew-hosts-executives.jpg

Jewish control of mass media is as much of a problem as the CIA minders spoon feeding them shit.

Maybe more so - Americans are given a Jewish/Zionist version of the world- it drives the wars, the lies on Iran and Syria, and the lies on Russia.

but people are terrified of being called a name. So no one actually discusses, openly, the predominant problem with media and a bijacked foreign policy, academy, and Hollywood.

In reply to by HRClinton