"There is the possibility that Wilson saw the documents before he made his report to the CIA on his trip, but if he did, he didn't mention them"
How do you know he didn't mention them? I haven't seen a text of his debriefing to CIA. He claims he didn't have a written report, which in itself seems strange. But when he was debriefed at CIA surely that would have been recorded. So anyway, where's the report?
It surely would have come out at the Senate hearings that Wilson "saw" these documents in Africa in Feb of 2002, and mentioned them in his "report" over 6 months before the CIA said they first saw them and turned them over to the IAEA for authentication.
The fact is that Wilson recanted on his statement to the Washington Post that he "saw" the documents in that early 2002 timeframe when pressed on the inconsistancy saying he was "confused."
I'd also say that if these documents were as easy to discredit as the article says (Google name search that any number of Freepers would have done automatically) it's mystifying to me that the CIA needed to turn to anyone to verify them. That smells mighty funny to me.