I think you have the wrong idea of wich one is spewing nonsense and isn't doing their job. But, fair enough.

It doesn't matter whether or not they are relaying the information in a manner that could be interpreted as a lie, the information they are relaying IS a lie. You can say well they may have done this or that, but there is no evidence to further support it. They've investigated this for quite a while even before election night where the FBI wiretapped Trump Tower to go a few floors below his in order to get in on illegal actions by other occupants. Odds are if they found something involving Russian collusion, they would have found it by now, but they haven't, and most likely they never will find this supposed information. You're holding  onto blind faith and hope that a man you don't see favorably gets exposed, when you don't have anything to expose him of.

I get it, you don't like Donald Trump, but please, stop attempting to defend CNN in this case. They openly just told you to your face about false information spread to misinform the public. Just because it favors the attack on Trump doesn't mean it's good, in fact many people who are kinda stuck in the middle see it as just wrong.

CNN: She's [Hillary] gotten a free ride so far from the media. We are the biggest one promoting her campaign

https://youtu.be/SkXkS70Co-o

If I only saw Trump's tweet in a black box with complete lack of knowledge of the surrounding current events then yes I would say that it was un-presidential and unprofessional.

In reality, though, the mainstream media has completely abdicated its responsibility to report news objectively and has been on a witch hunt to destroy Trump politically for the past year.  We have had Kathy Griffin hold the hair of a grisly depcapitated Trump head, we have had MSM repeatedly refuse to condemn and even tacitly support violence against Trump supporters, We have had CNN sponsor a series of plays where Trump is assassinated graphically, and we now have a self-admission that CNN's entire Russia narrative is basically made up.  That latest news also means that every one of the 10,000 sub-stories over the past 6 months that showing Trump/Russia collusion were at least seriously exaggerated if not complete lies themselves to support a narrative that has no substance  (ie. Trump and the Russian hookers, Trump leaking classified infor to Russia on laptop bombs,  Gen. Flynn plotting with the Russians, etc...)  And yet for all of this disinformation have we seen even one apology from CNN?  

I actually like your example about moderation on this forum, but how has moderation been applied to the mainstream media over the past year?  The New York Times suggests that it's OK to "punch a Nazi" but when an Antifa protestor burtally assaults peaceful Trump protestors with a bike lock the media isn't called to explain itself or held responsible for inciting violence.  The media constantly omits key details such as James Comey contradicting himself under oath about the Russian investigation in the hopes that the uninformed general public will draw an incorrect conclusion that will support their anti-Trump narrative.

Trump has been under constant attack from the media and a lot of their attacks are based on exaggeration, selective reporting, or complete falsehoods.  It's funny to me that people are screaming fowl when Trump retweets a fairly innocuous video that has him beating up an animated corporate CNN logo, what about the CNN sponsored play where Trump is getting stabbed to death?  Accountabiity goes both ways.  At some point, even the president is justified in taking the gloves off and fighting back.

Why would you assume that wiretapping the Russian Mafia between 2011 and 2013 would find evidence of collusion between the Russian government and the then non-existant Trump campaign? Using that as a means of undercutting the investigation makes me seriously scratch my head.

If you agree with my definition of what a lie is, what is the lie and who are the liars? 

(If CNN isn't "relaying the information in a manner that could be interpreted as a lie", then you have just told me that they are not lying.  And yet you also say that what they are saying is "a lie".  Therefore, you have told me that someone has lied to CNN and that CNN is credulously repeating the statement they have heard—which is someone else's lie, but not CNN's lie.  CNN is just wrong in that case, not lying.)

Specifically in response to "They openly just told you to your face about false information spread to misinform the public":  Please provide me with the quote where they said that.  All I heard the CNN guy in the video say was that he heard it secondhand that CNN is going after the Trump stories at the expense of other stories (shoddy journalism but not spreading false information), and that he thinks that the investigations that CNN is spending so much time and effort on will not turn up anything substantial in the end (still not spreading false information as long as CNN doesn't tell people "this investigation will definitely get results", and even if they did do that it would only be a lie if they also knew the opposite was true)

If CNN is spending all of their time desperately trying to dig up dirt on Trump with the specific goal of torpedoing his administration—or if they are just doing it for ratings—or for lulz—none of that is lying. 

I am all for nailing people to the wall that deserve it, but it must only be done with criticisms that are factually true.  That goes for CNN and Donald Trump equally.  In fact, I can recall creating only one thread on the subject of Donald Trump, and it was to defend him against his critics about a position he'd staked out.  (Sadly, that was shortly before one of the few times he's retracted a statement.)

First of all, let me copy this from Merriam-Webster:

Definition of lying

That is the definition of a lie, and that seems to be what CNN is doing, reporting information that is not factually backed up in any sort of manner or isn't proven by an outside source. It doesn't matter how many times they say it, if they don't have the evidence to back it up the 1000th time it's just as credible when you made it up the 1st time. And secondly, in a specific real world case like this, something is either true or false, there's no in between. Either you're lying and manipulating the truth, or in this case, you're just making it up as you go along, with no sort of proof to back your statements. There is no believing in a falsehood when it comes to things like this, either it's true or false.

Secondly, mind if I ask if you've seen the Van Jones video. He openly says there's nothing to it, and not to look into it because there's nothing there. The issue is CNN IS lying, because it doesn't matter how well they report on a lie, they are still reporting a lie. I

First of all, let me copy this from Merriam-Webster: 
Definition of lie
lied; lying ˈlī-iŋ
    intransitive verb
    1    :  to make an untrue statement with intent to deceive "She was lying when she said she didn't break the vase." "He lied about his past experience."
    2    :  to create a false or misleading impression "Statistics sometimes lie." "The mirror never lies."

That is the definition of lie, and it seems to not be what CNN is doing based on this video.  Assertions to the contrary have heretofore been not factually backed up with specific evidence. 

As for there being "no in between", here is how I see the possibilities: 
1.  Say something that is true and you believe it is true.  This is "honesty" and truth. 
2.  (rare) Say something that is true, but you believe it is false.  This is "a lie" despite being a true statement due to the speaker's intent to deceive. 
3.  Say something that is true, but you really have no clue if it's true and don't care.  This is "bullshit".  Trump does this a lot IMO. 
4.  Say something that is false, but you really have no clue if it's true and don't care.  This is "bullshit".  Trump does this a lot IMO. 
5.  Say something that is false, and you are aware that it is false.  This is "a lie" due to the speaker's intent to deceive. 
6.  Say something that is false, but you believe it is true.  This is "wrong".  It is not a lie. 

As for Van Jones, do you mean the "nothing-burger" quote?  here are two rebuttals: 
1.  Nothing short of 100% raw unedited footage can be trusted from O'Keefe, and I'd still take it with a grain of salt even then. 
2.  This is what Van Jones actually was trying to say. 

If you mean something else, you'll have to provide either the quote or your source.  Van Jones has said a lot of things, as might be expected from someone whose job is to go on television. 

So now, the meme maker behind the CNN WWE joke post is being threatened by CNN, with CNN openly going after him on their scheduled programming and reportedly threatening to dox him and reveal personal information about him on live television.

Here's a link to an article for the Washington Times, it was the best I could find for the time being.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2017/jul/5/cnn-threatens-reveal-reddit-user-real-identity-ove/

The man himself posted an apology, calling it political satire and a joke (which it was). However, this didn't stop the push from CNN, ultimately causing his comment to not only be deleted, but his account erased.

I have multiple things to say on this issue, but first I'll start with CNN's attack on (Dank) Memes. I've seen so many worse dank memes published online, and surprisingly enough, CNN didn't go for it. The fact that they took the bait of a meme of a meme (I know, Memeception) shows how quick they are to attack something they don't see as fair, although in this case, as I already stated, the Trump WWE clip was always a meme. The media didn't report on the WWE clip (well they might of, I don't know honestly) and say how it promotes violence against non Trump supporters. It was and always has been a joke, there's not much to look into in my opinion.

Lastly, I don't care who you are or what you believe in, whether Republican or Democrat, Conservative or Liberal, everyone should have the right to voice their own stance without having their entire life put in jeopardy by a company who wasn't even at risk in any of this. CNN just set a dangerous precedence, showing that if they don't like the joke or speech, they will go after you and threaten your well being. CNN doesn't have the right to publish someone's identity because he posted a joke and they didn't like it, leading to potential job issues, death threats, etc. It all puts into motion a dangerous issue, the idea of people in power going after you all because you said something they didn't like.

The idea of free speech currently reminds me of the issues of Nukes in the 1950's when MacArthur wanted to use them to supposedly stop a small war from getting bigger in his eyes. It puts into jeopardy the well being of all those who would be affected. Luckily for us Truman disposed of MacArthur and we sit on our computers to this day, but the idea of CNN going after a post like mine where they dox me and reveal my personal information to the public just kind of terrifies me, and I hope they put it down quickly in a Truman sort of way.

So, the guy that went for years on end claiming that Obama wasn't american accuses others of Witch hunt.

Don't you sense hypocrisy in that?

Either way this isnt about the press, it's about Trump. The tweets aren't stories made up, nor are they suspicions. They are facts. Besides, on the other end of the spectrum fox does the same thing but in the opposite direction.
The difference i see is that CNN throws suspicion, fox and Trump's friends outright lie. That is why i think they are clearly worse.