Yes really. The caption is right. Clinton and her campaign manager have accused Bernie Sanders of trying to win the democratic nomination.

I mean, how dare he. What a bloody cheek. ::lilgreenman:: ::

Some of my American friends might need to explain the underlying reality to me, because this is just about the most bizarre story I ever recall about US elections.

From the New Yorker:

Quote:

Clinton Campaign Accuses Sanders of Trying to Win Nomination

BY ANDY BOROWITZ

• [*=center]Share
  [*=center]Tweet
  [*=center]
  [*=center][email=?subject=From%20newyorker.com:%20Clinton%20Campaign%20Accuses%20Sanders%20of%20Trying%20to%20Win%20Nomination&body=Clinton%20Campaign%20Accuses%20Sanders%20of%20Trying%20to%20Win%20Nomination%0Ahttp%3A%2F%2Fwww.newyorker.com%2Fhumor%2Fborowitz-report%2Fclinton-campaign-accuses-sanders-of-trying-to-win-nomination][/email]
  [*=center]
  

CREDITPHOTOGRAPH BY JABIN BOTSFORD/THE WASHINGTON POST VIA GETTY NEW YORK (The Borowitz Report)The war of words between the two Democratic camps heated up over the weekend, as the Clinton campaign accused Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders of "blatantly attempting to win the Democratic nomination for President."
Appearing on NBC's "Meet the Press," the Clinton campaign spokesman Harland Dorrinson said that Sanders's actions in the past few weeks "left little doubt as to what his true intentions arenamely, to be the Party's nominee."

"He's been raising money, he's been running in primaries, and, yes, he's been winning caucuses," the Clinton aide said. "It's time for Bernie Sanders to come clean with the American people and admit what he's really up to."
"It's deeply troubling that what appeared at first to be a purely symbolic candidacy has turned into something else entirely," he said.
In an interview on CNN, Secretary Clinton said that she would not "take the bait" when she was asked whether she thought Sanders was trying to win the nomination, but she stopped short of disavowing the accusation.
"I think that's a question that only Senator Sanders can answer," she said. "But I think I speak for a lot of people when I say that if, at the end of the day, it turns out that Bernie Sanders has been doing everything he's been doing because he wants to be President, that would be very disappointing."

It's satire. More and more of these fake stories are popping up on facebook. This one was obvious to me, but some are not. Very annoying.

The Borowitz Report and The Onion are satirical, but given the state of confusion in the US, many people think they are real news articles.

Some vintage British political satire:

Is it real? Is it fake? It's The Onion, where it's funny and has truthiness.

Dawn Meredith Wrote:It's satire. More and more of these fake stories are popping up on facebook. This one was obvious to me, but some are not. Very annoying.

It wasn't obvious to me Dawn or I wouldn't have posted it. But then I wasn't aware that the publication was known for satire. My bad.

David Guyatt Wrote:

Dawn Meredith Wrote:It's satire. More and more of these fake stories are popping up on facebook. This one was obvious to me, but some are not. Very annoying.

It wasn't obvious to me Dawn or I wouldn't have posted it. But then I wasn't aware that the publication was known for satire. My bad.

The New Yorker isn't known for satire; only Borowitz's part is. That's what throws people.

LR Trotter Wrote:This thread is scary. It should make all readers kinda wonder about how much issue related satire is taken seriously! In all likelihood a mathematician, or at least someone mathematically smarter than I, with a little research just might be able to show some disturbing numbers.

More disturbing is how much issue-related false news and/or propaganda, slanted/biased reporting (and non-reporting) is taken seriously. It is also more pervasive - in fact, it dominates totally the MSM in the USA and much of the World. False and false-flag journalism is the dominant 'diet' of 'news' for all too many people - and they have little idea how far from reality it is, nor who is paying for it and why.

Tracy Riddle Wrote:

David Guyatt Wrote:

Dawn Meredith Wrote:It's satire. More and more of these fake stories are popping up on facebook. This one was obvious to me, but some are not. Very annoying.

It wasn't obvious to me Dawn or I wouldn't have posted it. But then I wasn't aware that the publication was known for satire. My bad.

The New Yorker isn't known for satire; only Borowitz's part is. That's what throws people.

Got me. I saw it was the New Yorker and figured it was serious. C'est la vie.

Peter Lemkin Wrote:

LR Trotter Wrote:This thread is scary. It should make all readers kinda wonder about how much issue related satire is taken seriously! In all likelihood a mathematician, or at least someone mathematically smarter than I, with a little research just might be able to show some disturbing numbers.

More disturbing is how much issue-related false news and/or propaganda, slanted/biased reporting (and non-reporting) is taken seriously. It is also more pervasive - in fact, it dominates totally the MSM in the USA and much of the World. False and false-flag journalism is the dominant 'diet' of 'news' for all too many people - and they have little idea how far from reality it is, nor who is paying for it and why.

Indeed. Take the recent Panama Paper where the Guardian (amongst others) lambasted Putin on day one even though his name hadn't appeared in any of the 11.5 million documents (Revealed: the $2 billion offshore trail that leads to Vladimir Putin). Whereas 441 American "names" that did appear in the documents weren't published for "privacy" reasons. If ever there is a clear definition of perfidious reporting based on hypocrisy and double standards, that was it. But sadly, there is so much of it now, that digesting these media lies and spin forms part of our daily diet.

It ensures that we read newspapers and monitor the news on our TV's with considerable care - and find other trusted sources of news to inform us.

The good thing at the Panama Papers story is that it has been thoroughly and convincingly debunked so quickly. The bad thing is that the powers that be don't care. They're using this story to get up a head of steam to close all offshore tax havens (except the ones in the domestic USA because they support the US dollar) and also to usher in a "global tax" (Christine LaGarde comments on a UN global tax body).