While I can't believe I'm saying it that article is actually a bit unfair in two ways to Trump.
Once Israel attacked circumstances did change, and you don't really need intelligence- in either sense- to know it. The Iranian weapons programme restarted nine days ago, and that isn't a 'vibe'; it's obviously the only way they are going to be able to deter attacks when conventional means have failed. It's the circumstances leading to that decision which are the important bit.
It's also pretty obvious that the Israeli calculus from the start would have been that them starting it would have to result in the US finishing it for those reasons, and that they would be incapable of actually finishing it, and that there could be no negotiations once bombing had started. Resulting in an open ended war against their main rival by their biggest sponsor, entirely to their benefit.
And we got here, ultimately, due to the collective policy of appeasing Israel at every step. That's not just Trump's fault, every single western and world leader who ran interference for Israel's ongoing genocide were effectively giving Israel the green light to do whatever they want. If you're okay with genocide- and they've amply demonstrated that they are- would anyone believe that you'd draw the line at bombing Iran? No, you would label it as 'defensive' aggression, precisely as happened.