And is it true that the sources are clouded, because they manipulate the events to fit their political agenda during the second iconoclatic controversy?
All historical sources manipulate events to fit their authors' political agendae. That doesn't preclude us from using them, or using them to produce a reconstruction of the past we see as accurate. For the particular topic, we've managed to reconstruct quite a bit, and if you're interested in a particularly good work on the subject, I would pick up Thomas F.X. Noble's Images, Iconoclasm, and the Carolingians, which looks at the controversy through its reception in the West.