I fail to see the claim that the article is false and misleading?

It sounds like what it states is what it is. Replace the phrase “currently has” with “didn’t” and your issue evaporates.

Which seems like unfair criticism given that the present or past tensing of an article’s statements are dependent on when it was written and is a rather fluid and interpretable thing. It’s a reasonable expectation that readers can understand and adjust their perspective of past vs present tense without failing to understand what the article is conveying…