Did Capitol Hill Blue Post An Article With Fabrications?

Me ^

[William McKinley]

In this article on Capitol Hill Blue, there are the following lines:

"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."

Serious allegations. But I notice it is a single source. Being a conservative, I value the lessons of experience, and experience has told me that single sources are to be treated with skeptism. When I see one, I want to know more about the source quoted so as to establish if I should treat that source as credible.

So what about "Terrance J. Wilkinson"?

A Google search for "Terrance J. Wilkinson" found no results (which will change when Google picks up the Capitol Hill Blue article).

Google suggested that the name might be Terrence. But a Google search on "Terrence J. Wilkinson" also produced no hits.

Perhaps the middle initial is the problem. Alas, a Google search on "Terrence Wilkinson" CIA gave no hits, and a Google search on "Terrance Wilkinson" CIA also yielded no hits.

A Google news search on Terrence Wilkinson comes up with nothing relevant. So does a Google news search of Terrance Wilkinson.

A Google search on one of the phrases from one of the quotations comes up empty.

I would anticipate a 'CIA advisor' who attends the same briefings as the President to live somewhere near D.C. But there are no listings according to Anywho for a Terrance or Terrence Wilkinson in D.C., Maryland, or Virginia.

A Google search on "CIA Advisor" Wilkinson also comes up empty.

Perhaps Capitol Hill Blue would be better served by providing some more information about the person quoted so that others can judge his credibility. That is, if he exists.

[Mo1]

Cut and paste is his friend

[Diddle E. Squat]

You can search the Internet until the cows come home and you probably won't turn up any information that from 1981-87, I worked for three different Republican congressmen on the Hill (as press secretary, chief of staff and a committee consultant).

First return from google(1st of 33 displayed of 54 returns) of search "press secretary" "doug thompson":

Thompson took a sabbatical from newspapers in 1981 and moved to Washington and work on Capitol Hill, where he served as press secretary to two members of Congress, Chief of Staff to a third and then Special Assistant to the Ranking Member of the House Space, Science and Technology Committee.

more results from that same search here

[Mo1]

I guess he was wrong huh?

[Doug Thompson]

QUOTE:
_____________
I would have taken your article more seriously if you would not have said Bush lied when even your source didn't say that. All he said was that Bush believed that it would be proven true and therefore, he went ahead and went with it. Your source did not say Bush told him something along the lines of: "Well, you are right, but I am going to say it anyway." The latter case would constitute lying. Not the former, which was actually what happened according to your source.

You also should have tried to find a second person to confirm what Wilkinson said.
______________________________

The use of the word "lied" has also sparked some controversy on the Capitol Hill Blue forum as well. It was my decision to use the word. Wilkinson did not accuse the President of lying. I did, based on information from other sources (who would not go on the record) that Bush was told outright that the information had been discredited before the State of the Union address but that he chose to use it anyway. To me that was a lie and I chose to use it in the headline and the lead of the story.

It has been interesting to watch how the various media have played the story today. Most have used words like "wrong" or "incorrect." The Washington Times said "White House concedes false Iraqi claim," almost as strong a headline as CNN's: "US knew uranium report was false."

So why such a strong headline from us? Because I'm mad. Bush didn't have to use a discredited claim to justify the war with Iraq. He had plenty of other justification, so why taint the issue with bad intel? As I said before, we don't pull in our punches for anyone. Not Bill Clinton, not George W. Bush. One week we're called leftist, the next we're a propaganda arm of the GOP. I once had a city editor who told me that "when you piss off both sides, you're doing your job." Based on our email, we must be doing our job.

Doug

[jpl]

I've read a couple of other reports on the web about this story, but yours is the only one I've seen so far that quotes Wilkinson by name. Will we see him quoted by name by another media orgnanzation other than your own?

[Senator Pardek]

You can search the Internet until the cows come home and you probably won't turn up any information that from 1981-87...

Demonstrably false.

[Right Wing Professor]

You also won't turn up the fact that from 1987-1992, I ran the Political Action Committee for the National Association of Realtors (at that time the nation's largest PAC) or that I worked for the Reagan-Bush re-election campaign in 1984, served as a campaign consultant to both the National Republican Congressional Campaign Committee and the National Republican Senatorial Committee or that I worked from 1992-2002 for The Eddie Mahe Comapny, one of Washington's oldest and best known Republican consulting firms (at the same time I was publishing Capitol Hill Blue).

You're way too modest. Using the search string 'Doug Thompson Eddie Mahe', google gave me this as the second hit:

http://www.politicsonline.com/netpulsearchives/221netpulse.html

A warm NetPulse welcome to two new contributing editors - - Doug Thompson and Richard K. Faust, both of Washington.  Thompson is founder and publisher of Capitol Hill Blue, a daily Web e-zine started in 1994 that averages 200,000 user sessions a day.  A former congressional staffer, he is a communications specialist with the Eddie Mahe Company.  

Putting your name in with the NAR in a search string I got this autobiographical piece

http://chblue.com/artman/publish/article_1520.shtml

Which is linked to your bio, containing the rest of the information.

Agreed that google isn't a substitute for other research. But it isn't bad, either :-)

Nice to meet you, BTW. Interesting CV.

[Neets]

You can search the Internet until the cows come home and you probably won't turn up any information that from 1981-87, I worked for three different Republican congressmen on the Hill (as press secretary, chief of staff and a committee consultant). You also won't turn up the fact that from 1987-1992, I ran the Political Action Committee for the National Association of Realtors (at that time the nation's largest PAC) or that I worked for the Reagan-Bush re-election campaign in 1984, served as a campaign consultant to both the National Republican Congressional Campaign Committee and the National Republican Senatorial Committee or that I worked from 1992-2002 for The Eddie Mahe Comapny, one of Washington's oldest and best known Republican consulting firms (at the same time I was publishing Capitol Hill Blue).

Not to toot YOUR own horn..but I just did find most of that information on a quick google search.

[Neets]

LOL you all beat me to it..or someone is trying to be modest!!!

[William McKinley]

Nice theory.

Except he is not a current CIA asset. He is retired, according to his 'words'.

[rwfromkansas]

Alright sir. I am more comfortable with your reporting here.

I have sent you a freepmail with some questions to send to Wilkinson if he chooses to respond. If I feel there is a big story here, I will run with it myself in my college paper.

[Doug Thompson]

QUOTE:
______________________________________________________
You're way too modest. Using the search string 'Doug Thompson Eddie Mahe', google gave me this as the second hit:

http://www.politicsonline.com/netpulsearchives/221netpulse.html

A warm NetPulse welcome to two new contributing editors - - Doug Thompson and Richard K. Faust, both of Washington. Thompson is founder and publisher of Capitol Hill Blue, a daily Web e-zine started in 1994 that averages 200,000 user sessions a day. A former congressional staffer, he is a communications specialist with the Eddie Mahe Company.
______________________________________________________

I stand corrected. I've never done a search on myself but others have told me that none of my political work ever shows up, even though I've been quoted in a number of publiations as a "Republican operative" or "GOP consultant."

Doug

[Mo1]

FYI

Looked who showed up

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/942488/posts?page=84#84

[Doug Thompson]

QUOTE:
________________________________________________________
I have sent you a freepmail with some questions to send to Wilkinson if he chooses to respond. If I feel there is a big story here, I will run with it myself in my college paper.
________________________________________________________

I will pass it on.

Doug

[Republican Wildcat]

You stated in the article that the White House "admitted Bush lied." Nothing of the sort occurred. You weren't merely not holding back any punches. You were simply not telling the truth.

Your article is not truthful. Period.

[section9]

You can search the Internet until the cows come home and you probably won't turn up any information that from 1981-87, I worked for three different Republican congressmen on the Hill (as press secretary, chief of staff and a committee consultant). You also won't turn up the fact that from 1987-1992, I ran the Political Action Committee for the National Association of Realtors (at that time the nation's largest PAC) or that I worked for the Reagan-Bush re-election campaign in 1984, served as a campaign consultant to both the National Republican Congressional Campaign Committee and the National Republican Senatorial Committee or that I worked from 1992-2002 for The Eddie Mahe Comapny, one of Washington's oldest and best known Republican consulting firms (at the same time I was publishing Capitol Hill Blue).

Nice try, Doug.

But not enough. Saying "well, there's no information about my political work in the Eighties for Republicans on Google, ergo, Google is suspect" does not mean that your individual from January happens to exist. Indeed, if he was some "high powered consultant" in D.C., wouldn't there be some record of his activities from the late nineties?

And Nick Danger and others didn't just use Google. They used NEXIS, they used WHOIS, they used several different Web and non Web-based search methods. Your friend from January just didn't show up. Your Republican Consultant is off playing Miniature Golf somewhere; meanwhile, we're supposed to buy into Wilkenson?

Then, today, this Mystery Man shows up who gives you (not Dana Milbank, not Andrea Mitchell, not even Bob Woodward, but you) a story that just happens to jive with your obvious dislike of the President and your opposition to this war. Oh, not only is Bush deceptive, but he gets frostily angry with people who won't agree with his cooked up evidence! "Why, dagnabbit, I'll find the Evidence when we get to Eye-Rack! Meanwhile, make it up!"

Oh, but I forgot. Bush is stupid. Bush is dumb enough to say this in front of witnesses who could rat him out later on.

Good research does depend on using more than Google, in that you are quite correct. But I'll go you one better. Good reporting depends on using more than one source. Get me more than one source to that meeting, a REAL individual who is prepared to go on record, and I might just believe you.

Oh, and parking your dislike of the President at the door might help, as well. Saying you would have been just as tough on Al Gore leaves me with one emotion....

Be Seeing You,

Chris

[firewalk]

Thanks for the ping

[Diddle E. Squat]

I stand corrected. I've never done a search on myself but others have told me that none of my political work ever shows up, even though I've been quoted in a number of publiations as a "Republican operative" or "GOP consultant."

Hmmmm, someone gave you wrong info which you then passed on without verifying. I wonder why that sounds familiar on this thread...

[cyncooper]

When we ran the stories about Bill Clinton's sexual assaults on women, we identified a number of the women and the stories were widely discussed here. I don't recall anyone at Free Republic demanding "proof" of their identity

Whether anyone at Free Republic hounded you for substantiation, rest assured, those names were researched and vetted and it was well noted which names the stories could not be verified.

And I would note, when considering a story one considers the subject. Bush as an honest man is not a "liar", hence the dispute of your characterization. Clinton as a predator was amply documented.

[rwfromkansas]

I am still skeptical of this quote, but am willing to send some questions to get forwarded to Wilkinson. Doug may be telling the truth.

I still am amazed at the lack of info on the guy in question though online, if he is real and my hunch is he is due to Doug's seemlingly direct and clear defense. But, it is just a hunch and I won't just accept what Doug says as a reporter myself.