TRUMP FIRES ATTORNEY GENERAL AFTER COPY OF CONSTITUTION IS FOUND ON HER COMPUTER

WASHINGTON —Donald Trump fired the acting Attorney General, Sally Q. Yates, after learning that she had downloaded a copy of the United States Constitution to her computer, Trump told reporters on Monday night.
According to the Trump Administration’s code of ethics, established by Steve Bannon, a counsellor to the President, “possessing, reading, or referring to the United States Constitution" is a violation that is punishable by termination.
Suspecting that Yates was in breach of that rule, Bannon seized Yates’s computer at the Justice Department and discovered that she had secretly downloaded a complete copy of the 1789 document.
“Sally Yates was hatching a covert plot to require my actions to be in accordance with the Constitution," Trump said. “We caught her red-handed."
Trump said he hoped Yates’s firing would send Justice Department staffers the message that “if you are caught flagrantly obeying the Constitution, you will be out of here."
“The American people deserve an Attorney General who will come to work every day ready to flout the Constitution, and in Jeff Sessions, they will have one," he said.
Andy Borowitz is a New York Times best-selling author and a comedian who has written for The New Yorker since 1998. He writes the Borowitz Reportfor newyorker.com.

This stinks of fake news. Too damn much of that flying around right now, preventing people from evaluating actual misconduct.

This stinks of fake news. Too damn much of that flying around right now, preventing people from evaluating actual misconduct.
Only an idiot would take it as fake news instead of satire.
This stinks of fake news. Too damn much of that flying around right now, preventing people from evaluating actual misconduct.
Only an idiot would take it as fake news instead of satire.No, I think it goes to show how effective they've been in blurring the lines between real and fake news.
This stinks of fake news. Too damn much of that flying around right now, preventing people from evaluating actual misconduct.
Only an idiot would take it as fake news instead of satire. Where is the attribution? No where do you say who specifically published that. Was it that Andy Borowitz guy, working for the New Yorker at the time or somewhere else?
This stinks of fake news. Too damn much of that flying around right now, preventing people from evaluating actual misconduct.
Only an idiot would take it as fake news instead of satire. Where is the attribution? No where do you say who specifically published that. Was it that Andy Borowitz guy, working for the New Yorker at the time or somewhere else? TA, Guess you aren't paying much attention to world events. Hello, we're in the post-attribution age. Don't need no stinking facts or attribution no mo. The biggest mouth piece wins. Although my first guess would be The Onion.. ;-P

Okay, once again I was mistaken:
http://www.newyorker.com/humor/borowitz-report/trump-fires-attorney-general-after-copy-of-constitution-is-found-on-her-computer
but only partly :cheese:

This stinks of fake news. Too damn much of that flying around right now, preventing people from evaluating actual misconduct.
Only an idiot would take it as fake news instead of satire. Where is the attribution? No where do you say who specifically published that. Was it that Andy Borowitz guy, working for the New Yorker at the time or somewhere else?You're just not familiar with Borowitz. He was in the business of fake news, like the Onion, before Mr Alt Fact came along. And it was usually unsubtle enough to realize it was fake. What's amazing is that now it's sometimes truly difficult to tell the difference without fact-checking, etc.
This stinks of fake news. Too damn much of that flying around right now, preventing people from evaluating actual misconduct.
Only an idiot would take it as fake news instead of satire. Where is the attribution? No where do you say who specifically published that. Was it that Andy Borowitz guy, working for the New Yorker at the time or somewhere else?You're just not familiar with Borowitz. He was in the business of fake news, like the Onion, before Mr Alt Fact came along. And it was usually unsubtle enough to realize it was fake. What's amazing is that now it's sometimes truly difficult to tell the difference without fact-checking, etc. One would hope that the heading: "SATIRE FROM THE BOROWITZ REPORT" would help give people a hint. But what do I know about what goes on inside the mindscapes of Hollywoodized Americans these days.[/I] ~~~~~~~~~~ Also lest we overlook it the opening post snuck in a hint:
Andy Borowitz is a New York Times best-selling author and a comedian who has written for The New Yorker since 1998. He writes the Borowitz Report for newyorker.com.

Speaking of which, maybe we should make this the permanent BOROWITZ REPORT tracking thread.
Got the feeling there will be other good headlines.

Oh hell, lookie here:

TRUMP SAYS HE HAS BEEN TREATED VERY UNFAIRLY BY PEOPLE WHO WROTE CONSTITUTION http://www.newyorker.com/humor/borowitz-report/trump-says-he-has-been-treated-very-unfairly-by-people-who-wrote-constitution WASHINGTON (The Borowitz Report)—Hinting darkly that “there’s something going on," Donald J. Trump complained on Friday that he has been treated “very unfairly" by the people who wrote the United States Constitution. “If the Constitution prevented me from doing one or two things, I’d chalk that up to bad luck," he said. “But when literally everything I want to do is magically a violation of the Constitution, that’s very unfair and bad treatment." Lashing out at the document’s authors, Trump said that “America is a great country, but we have maybe the worst constitution writers in the world." “Russia has much better constitution writers than we do," he said. “I talked to Putin, and he said their constitution never gives him problems." “The situation is very unfair!" he added. ...
REPUBLICANS ACCUSE VOTERS OF USING TOWN HALLS TO EXPRESS THEMSELVES By Andy Borowitz http://www.newyorker.com/humor/borowitz-report/republicans-accuse-voters-of-using-town-halls-to-express-themselves WASHINGTON (The Borowitz Report)—Saying “Enough is enough," Republican senators on Friday angrily accused their constituents of “intentionally and opportunistically" using recent town-hall meetings as vehicles to express themselves. One of the angriest Republicans, Senator Tom Cotton, of Arkansas, said he was “disgusted and offended" by the “flagrant exercise of freedom of speech" he witnessed at his town hall. “The spectacle of people standing up, asking their elected representatives questions, and expecting them to answer is the most disgraceful thing I’ve ever experienced," Cotton said. “This will not stand." Cotton accused “outside agitators" of sending voters to the town halls “to cynically exploit an obscure provision in the Constitution called the First Amendment." “I’m not a conspiracy theorist, but isn’t it a little suspicious that, in town hall after town hall, all these voters were so well-versed in one tiny sentence in the Constitution?" he said. “It doesn’t pass the smell test." ...
This stinks of fake news. Too damn much of that flying around right now, preventing people from evaluating actual misconduct.
If you actually think that's "fake news" rather than satire, you're a lot further gone than anybody would have thought. Ll
This stinks of fake news. Too damn much of that flying around right now, preventing people from evaluating actual misconduct.
Only an idiot would take it as fake news instead of satire.No, I think it goes to show how effective they've been in blurring the lines between real and fake news. They haven't been efective in getting rational people to believe the fake news. How about listing some fake news stories you've come across, not counting Fox News--that would be too easy.
This stinks of fake news. Too damn much of that flying around right now, preventing people from evaluating actual misconduct.
Only an idiot would take it as fake news instead of satire. Where is the attribution? No where do you say who specifically published that. Was it that Andy Borowitz guy, working for the New Yorker at the time or somewhere else? So you need to know it's a known satirist to know that it's satire! You're further gone than I thought.
This stinks of fake news. Too damn much of that flying around right now, preventing people from evaluating actual misconduct.
Only an idiot would take it as fake news instead of satire. Where is the attribution? No where do you say who specifically published that. Was it that Andy Borowitz guy, working for the New Yorker at the time or somewhere else?You're just not familiar with Borowitz. He was in the business of fake news, like the Onion, before Mr Alt Fact came along. And it was usually unsubtle enough to realize it was fake. What's amazing is that now it's sometimes truly difficult to tell the difference without fact-checking, etc. Borowitz no more in the business of "fake news" than Mark Twain was (assuming you've heard of him). You apparently also have no sense of humor and take everything literally. Children, too, don't usually "get" satire until a certain age. You've got a lot of maturing to do. For you and anyone who took it as "Fake news" and who can't tell the difference between fake news, actual news and satire, it was Borowitz. http://www.newyorker.com/humor/borowitz-report/trump-fires-attorney-general-after-copy-of-constitution-is-found-on-her-computer
This stinks of fake news. Too damn much of that flying around right now, preventing people from evaluating actual misconduct.
Only an idiot would take it as fake news instead of satire. Where is the attribution? No where do you say who specifically published that. Was it that Andy Borowitz guy, working for the New Yorker at the time or somewhere else?You're just not familiar with Borowitz. He was in the business of fake news, like the Onion, before Mr Alt Fact came along. And it was usually unsubtle enough to realize it was fake. What's amazing is that now it's sometimes truly difficult to tell the difference without fact-checking, etc. One would hope that the heading: "SATIRE FROM THE BOROWITZ REPORT" would help give people a hint. But what do I know about what goes on inside the mindscapes of Hollywoodized Americans these days.[/I]. ~~~~~~~~~~ Also lest we overlook it the opening post snuck in a hint:
Andy Borowitz is a New York Times best-selling author and a comedian who has written for The New Yorker since 1998. He writes the Borowitz Report for newyorker.com.
I guess we should always say something like that, and add for the fools who might come across it: THIS IS SATIRE. IT'S SUPPOSED TO BE FUNNY. IF YOU WERE LOOKING FOR FAKE NEWS GO TO FOX NEWS, BETTER NAMED FAUX NEWS. SATIRE IS DEFINITELY OVER YOUR HEAD.
So you need to know it's a known satirist to know that it's satire! You're further gone than I thought.
Have we ever met? How do you know I'm "gone"? Maybe I've never read the New Yorker, which I really haven't. Besides, I think you're missing the point here: the CFI is supposed to be an assemblage of skeptical people, not of hip in-crowd people. The danger of fake news and maybe satire is that people *believe* the publications, not that people do not and/or recognize in-crowd jokes.
This stinks of fake news. Too damn much of that flying around right now, preventing people from evaluating actual misconduct.
If you read that as fake news, you need a lesson in satire.

On my Facebook feed, on the Andy Borowitz header, it says, in big letters, “Not the News”. Jon Stewart used to say, “welcome to the fake news”. Fox on the other hand, only uses the defense that some of their very news looking shows on their news channel are actually entertainment, AFTER they get caught in huge lies or exaggerations.
Really Trombone, we know you by what you type. What you type is “gone”.