Neely Tucker and Sue Schmidt inform us via headline that "Ray Concludes There Was No Wrongdoing on Part of Clintons."

This is not just misleading--it's a lie. Ray concluded no such thing. His report did not absolve the First Felons--it simply said that there was insufficient evidence to convict.

This is no doubt true because:
a) much of it was shredded, or witnesses were intimidated or paid off, and
b) it would have been difficult to find a jury that wouldn't have one or two die-hard supporters, resulting in a hung panel (as happened with Susan McDougal).

There was never any way to get the goods on that gang without an all-out RICO prosecution, and Janet Reno's Department of Injustice was never going to allow that.

And before I get a lot of nonsense about innocence until proven guilty, that applies only to courts of law, not courts of public (or private) opinion.

[Update at 2PM PST]

Compare and contrast the Washington Post headline with this (accurate) one from Fox:

Final Report Shows Clintons Benefited from Criminal Transactions

Whether this is a good summary of the report is, of course, disputable, but unlike the WaPo headline, at least it's true.

[Update at 3:20PM PST]

Down the ol' memory hole...

Now the subhead on the Tucker/Schmidt article has been changed from the above to Ray Criticizes Comments by Former President Clinton. You'll just have to take my word for it as to what the subhead was originally.

I wonder if they got a lot of angry email and calls, or if some editor just noticed it on his own. Thanks to The Sanity Inspector for pointing out the instant rewriting of history.

This kind of stuff really makes me angry, because it was ongoing throughout the entire eight years of the Administration. Clinton spinners and defenders would continually equate "insufficient evidence to convict" with "proof of innocence." So the public, who didn't necessarily actually read the underlying reports (whether Pillsbury, Starr, or whatever) would come away with the vague impression that the Clintons never did anything wrong, but were simply always under attack by the evil VRWC.

Looks like someone at the Post agrees with you, Mr. Simberg. As of 5:05 EST, that headline reads, "Final Report on Whitewater Released:
Ray Criticizes Comments by Former President Clinton." Nice of the editors to pull their noses out of the Big He's ass, upon request.

Interesting. I wonder if they got a lot of calls and email?