The New York Times is so busy trying to protect Bush on the Downing Street Memo, that they can't even figure out the proper way to exonerate him,
changing its story from day to day:
Readers of The New York Times learned on June 13 that in the summer of 2002, the Bush administration had not yet made the decision to invade Iraq, and a recently released British document doesn't prove it had. On June 14, Times readers learned that that document and the Downing Street Memo, released in May, may show that the decision to invade had been made by the summer of 2002, but it doesn't much matter because everyone in Washington knew that Bush had already made the decision to invade.
Confused? The Times seems to be.
Yes, the Times is confused about just how to make the Bush administration look the most blameless on Iraq -- in the face of overwhelming evidence to the contrary.