If correct (and I'm inclined to believe them here as it's a key component of their process), then they would have no knowledge one way or another as to who the true submitter really was. I think Assange is bending the truth by denying the source of the submission—if his staff's statement is true then he would have no way of knowing.
Under Occam's Razor I'd conclude that they got played in the exact way that was intended.
It seems very likely to me that the NSA has means to determine the origin of the source that Assange does not have. He's as easy to fool as any other single person who sits in an embassy with a laptop.
So yeah, I would give more credibility to the NSA than to Assange in this case, without any need to accuse him of lying.
I don't really read anything new in the article except what was already mentioned in October.