Sorry to burst your bubble, but even if the reporter's story is true, what he has produced to back it up is worthless. Unless one of the people who attended those meetings or wrote those memos comes forward to authenticate what was said at the meetings (remember, what was written about the meetings is relevant only to the extent it memorializes what was said at the meetings) then there is no evidence to substantiate anything, and this is a non-story. How convenient that a British lefty journalist destroyed the originals. How well he learned the lessons of Gunga Dan.
Now, if he had kept the originals, but hidden them in a safe deposit box somewhere in order to produce them at a hearing or provide them to an authentication expert, then you might follow up on this story to some extent, but only on the idea that you would get the originals. With the admission that the originals (which were themselves copies) have been destroyed, this story is a big nothing.
And, notwithstanding all the crap conjectures of the lefties, even if the memos were true, it is a big nothing. What are they saying, the Bush administration early on decided to target Iraq and said that they wanted to make their best case for regime change? Wasn't it Clinton who in 1998 made regime change the policy of the US, because Saddam refused to comply with inspections? Had he complied by 2003? End of story.
The stupidity of leftists and their minions is astonishing to me.
Lets not forget Clintoons regime change policies in Haiti and Bosnia.