The Western corporate media has largely closed ranks on the false narrative that Assad's regime was responsible for the April 4th, 2017 chemical weapons attack in Idlib, Syria. But Maria Zakharova, Director of the Information and Press Department of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Russian Federation, in an informative press briefing on Youtube, where she thoroughly handles a prodding CBS reporter, points out that there is an expert agency tasked with investigating such claims, the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW), and she invited the Western war mongers to allow them to investigate. (Note, you will find lots more gems like that on Inessa S's Youtube channel , where anyone who is curious can see that the demonization of Russia is based largely on an invented narrative of a war-like, evil Russia. But if you listen to their leaders and diplomats they are more sane and intelligent than Western leaders, especially on foreign policy matters.)

If you look up the OPCW organization's website as of today, April 10th, they still have not concluded their investigation according to a release dated April 7th:

UPDATED Media Brief: Reported Use of Chemical Weapons, Southern Idlib, Syria, 4 April 2017

The Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) is a treaty-based international organisation that operates according to a strict confidentiality regime, which governs the operations of the Organisation, protects the integrity of its investigations, ensures the security of its technical experts, and determines what information can be made public.

...

The OPCW is investigating the incident in southern Idlib under the on-going mandate of the Fact-Finding Mission (FFM), which is “to establish facts surrounding allegations of the use of toxic chemicals, reportedly chlorine, for hostile purposes in the Syrian Arab Republic”. The OPCW cannot and will not release information about an on-going investigation. This policy exists to preserve the integrity of the investigatory process and its results as well as to ensure the safety and security of OPCW experts and personnel involved. All parties are asked to respect the confidentiality parameters required for a rigorous and unimpeded investigation.

...

But the Trump administration and Western media closed ranks on the narrative that Assad did it and American destroyers launched cruise missle strikes which hit the Shayrat Airfield in Homs on the 6th.

Indeed this is nothing new, in 2013 the "American deep state" tried the same stunt of using a chemical attack as a pretext to strike the Syrian Armed Forces. They used a chemical weapons attack by "their moderate" Islamic terrorist allies as a potential fait accompli for an attack on Syria, but the dovish Obama desisted. In 2017 the hawkish Trump didn't.

Deutsche Welle: Is Assad to blame for the chemical weapons attack in Syria?

...

In 2014, investigative journalist Seymour Hersh reported on opposition forces' ability to use chemical weapons. In an article for the "London Review of Books," Hersh obtained documents from the Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA), the Pentagon's own spy organization. They suggested that the Nusra Front, a Syrian offshoot of al Qaeda, had access to the sarin nerve agent. A chemical weapons attack on the Damascus suburb of Ghouta in August 2013, which was blamed on Assad, was carried out by rebels, according to Hersh's article. They wanted Washington to presume Assad had crossed Obama's "red line" and draw the US into a war.

The Ghouta attack

Obama's Director of National Intelligence at the time, James Clapper, was able to dissuade Obama from ordering a cruise missile strike, according to a newly-published book by Mideast expert Michael Lüders. Presumably, a deciding factor was an analysis of the chemical weapons used in Ghouta, conducted by a British military lab, which found the gas to be of a different composition than the Syrian army possessed.

The attack took place while UN weapons inspectors were in the country, on Assad's invitation, said Meyer. Assad had asked them to investigate a chemical weapons attack from March 2013 outside Aleppo, which killed Syrian soldiers.

"It makes no sense that the regime would carry out an attack with inspectors in the country," he said. SYMBOLBILD USA verstärken Marine-Präsenz vor syrischer Küste (picture-alliance/dpa)

Former weapons inspector Richard Lloyd and MIT professor Theodore Postol cast further doubt on Assad's role in the Ghouta attack. They reported in 2014 that the chemical weapons could have only been fired from rebel-held territory, with a range of up to 2.5 kilometers (1.6 miles).

Indeed, most of the Assad "already did it" before the incident was investigated, evidence hinges on the Western created White Helmets:

Alternet: How the White Helmets Became International Heroes While Pushing U.S. Military Intervention and Regime Change in Syria

...

Yet the group is anything but impartial. The White Helmets’ leadership is driven by a pro-interventionist agenda conceived by the Western governments and public relations groups that back them. Anyone who visits the group’s website—which is operated by an opposition-funded PR company known as the Syria Campaign—will be immediately directed to a request to sign a petition for a no-fly zone to “stop the bombs” in Syria. These sorts of communiques highlight the dual role the White Helmets play as a civil defense organization saving lives while lobbying for a U.S. military campaign that will almost inevitably result in the collapse of Syria’s government.

...

The White Helmets were founded in collaboration with USAID’s Office of Transitional Initiatives—the wing that has promoted regime change around the world—and have been provided with $23 million in funding from the department. USAID supplies the White Helmets through Chemonics, a for-profit contractor based in Washington DC that has become notorious for wasteful aid imbroglios from Haiti to Afghanistan. While members of the White Helmets have been implicated in atrocities carried out by jihadist rebel groups, the names of many of the firms that supposedly monitor and evaluate their work have been kept secret by USAID on unspecified security grounds.