BIAS ALERT: Pelley's 'no credible source' dig ignores New York Times

CBS Evening News anchor Scott Pelley apparently thinks The Old Gray Lady has no credibility.

In an apparent bid to boost Hillary Clinton’s and diminish President Trump's on alleged Russian collusion – Pelley mangled a tweet from the president and suggested Trump had no facts to back up his assertion of a quid-pro-quo between Russia and the Clintons in a 2010 uranium deal.

“Well, today, President Trump sowed confusion on the Russian investigation,” Pelley said Wednesday night. “He asked why the media are not covering, quote, ‘Money from Russia to Clinton for the sale of uranium.’ Well, here’s why: No credible source alleges that Hillary Clinton was paid by Russia for American uranium.”

But Pelley’s “fact-check” got a few things wrong.

First, Trump’s Tuesday tweet in full: “Why doesn’t Fake News talk about [Clinton campaign chairman John] Podesta ties to Russia as covered by @FoxNews or money from Russia to Clinton – sale of Uranium?”

Nowhere in the tweet does Trump explicitly reference Hillary Clinton, as Pelley makes it seem, and The New York Times has previously written about the infamous 2010 uranium deal to which Trump is referring.

That deal involved then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton signing off on Russia’s controlling stake in mining company Uranium One. PolitiFact – a left-leaning, self-appointed fact checker – even admits “some investors with an interest in making the Uranium One deal go through have a long-time relationship with Bill Clinton and have donated to the Clinton Foundation.” Prior to the deal, Bill Clinton was also paid $500,000 for a speech by a Russian investment bank.

The Times picked up from there in an April 2015 report.

“Whether the donations played any role in the approval of the uranium deal is unknown,” the Times wrote, as noted by News Busters. “But the episode underscores the special ethical challenges presented by the Clinton Foundation, headed by a former president who relied heavily on foreign cash to accumulate $250 million in assets even as his wife helped steer American foreign policy as secretary of state, presiding over decisions with the potential to benefit the foundation’s donors.”

Peter Schweizer also details the entire shady episode in his book “Clinton Cash.”

But apparently that was “no credible source” for Pelley.