Yes, those answers are mere suppositions. However, there is a reason. The answer could be as simple as “Pres Bush hated arguing with people.” I hope it’s much more sinister than that. If that’s it, then that means Pres. Bush was totally naïve, and I just don’t see evidence for that.
I think the NYT is absolutely using this as a justification for beating the drums for war. The NYT isn’t anti-war; they’re anti-the-wars-they-don’t-like, and pro-the-wars-they-do-like.
Is the new story concerning this about finds of actual WMD stores that the administration didn’t release to the press at all for some reason or about the old stories that were released and ignored or dismissed by the press?
Freegards
I do think W (and Rove) miscalculated in the worst of ways with their "new tone" doctrine. They decided that rebuttal lead to many things: degradation of the political process, polarization, escalation of bitterness, etc. ad nauseum.
This was the worst of political thinking, the worst mistake W (Rove) made. It allowed their (and our) political enemies to drive through boatloads, trainloads of lies in to our lives. Unrebutted they became truth in the minds of many Americans. Our media gladly helped with that, and now our body politic is totally infected with so called truths (lies) that simmer like ebola.
It was the worst thing W did, it was a huge mistake with huge consequences.