meant to confuse and muddy the waters.
The Wilkinson story had the guy right in the oval office with Bush while the uranium/WMD story was being cooked. It would have eclipsed the Joe Wilson story - except that it turned out to be a lying "source" and was retracted by Capital Hill Blue or whatever the name of that paper is.
A lot of damage was done and I spent days putting out nutty right wing "fires" with dumb asses that can't tell the difference between the two names and thought one discrediting covered both.
edited to add some links:
I think the original article has been scrubbed but here's some text from it:
An intelligence consultant who was present at two White House briefings where the uranium report was discussed confirmed that the President was told the intelligence was questionable and that his national security advisors urged him not to include the claim in his State of the Union address.
“The report had already been discredited,” said Terrance J. Wilkinson, a CIA advisor present at two White House briefings. “This point was clearly made when the President was in the room during at least two of the briefings.”
Bush’s response was anger, Wilkinson said.
“He said that if the current operatives working for the CIA couldn’t prove the story was true, then the agency had better find some who could,” Wilkinson said. “He said he knew the story was true and so would the world after American troops secured the country.”
http://www.lies.com/wp/2003/07/09/ari-gilliard-wilson-wilkinson-me-time-to-fess-up-on-wmd/and the mea culpa:
http://www.capitolhillblue.com/cgi-bin/artman/exec/view.cgi?archive=19&num=2529