It's written as a statement, not as a figure of speech. If it's not intended to be factual, it should be annotated as such. It literally claims theft as it stands, which makes the article seem juvenile in use of language.
How did 'beervirus and I know how to interpret the phrase successfully?
It doesn't have to be labeled in big flashing letters "THIS IS A FIGURE OF SPEECH" for reasonable people to construe it as a figure of speech.
See? Clearly presented as fact by the language used and yet clearly it's nonsense. No label necessary.