'Hilarious!' Julia Louis-Dreyfus' 'birthmark' is 'proof' Rolling Stone didn't make historical mistake [pic]

Sarah D. | 4:24 PM on April 10, 2014

Twitter was abuzz yesterday over Julia Louis-Dreyfus’ Rolling Stone cover photo, which featured the Constitution on the “Veep” star’s back:

In my defense, “I was in a drunken stupor” #crackexcuse http://t.co/Jo0HgFtpho cc: @RollingStone pic.twitter.com/f7SFgCsHBO

— Julia Louis-Dreyfus (@OfficialJLD) April 8, 2014

Also featured? John Hancock’s signature. Which is all well and good, except for one thing: Hancock didn’t sign the Constitution.

Louis-Dreyfus initially explained the oops away in character:

Hancock signed Dec. of Independence NOT Constitution.Yet another Mike fuck-up.Dummy.#veep #crackexcuse @VeepHBO @mrmattwalsh cc@rollingstone

— Julia Louis-Dreyfus (@OfficialJLD) April 9, 2014

But today, she changed her story and presented herself in an even more revealing light:

#TBT John Hancock not part of tattoo.It is a birthmark.1962 photo is proof. Apologies 2 @RollingStone #crackexcuse pic.twitter.com/h9fYXGqBSo

— Julia Louis-Dreyfus (@OfficialJLD) April 10, 2014

Ha! Needless to say, the excuse went over well:

Well played MT @OfficialJLD: #TBT John Hancock not part of tattoo. it's a birthmark. Apologies 2 @RollingStone pic.twitter.com/M6bAemXUfD

— anthonyquintano (@AnthonyQuintano) April 10, 2014

wins Twitter. RT @OfficialJLD: John Hancock not part of tattoo.It is birthmark.1962 photo. @RollingStone pic.twitter.com/zYoXzVXieE

— Rick Klein (@rickklein) April 10, 2014