There isn't a single source or person or Anon whose information need not be scrutinized. You relentlessly argue for a quasi-belief in a self-described satire site's every story without question. It defies logic. The information must defend itself. This is q research. Those who have a default disbelief in a source that calls itself a liar are like a person on trial. We do not have to prove our innocence. The burden of proof belongs to one making the assertion.