POWER LINE notes that the AP is at it again.

UPDATE: That was quick. AP has changed the headline and the story. It’s nice that they fix these things when people point them out, but it’s telling that the first iteration seems to involve such a partisan anti-Bush spin.

ANOTHER UPDATE: A reader emails:

Doesn’t this remind you of the sneaky TV lawyers who ask a loaded question which they KNOW will thrown out upon objection?

Then, the judge intones, ” The jury will disregard…” but the damage is done. And wasn’t that the whole point of the question? CAN the jury simple forget they ever heard?

The blogosphere now sits in the judge’s role, yet, the damage is done. Thousands of news sites received the damaging title and used it. Bah!

But the witness’s credibility is damaged. Especially if you read what Power Line has discovered about the reporter in question.

MORE: A reader notes that the reporter didn’t write the headline (they never do), which is true enough, and worth stressing. But she did write the story.