Reading before the College of Physicians in Philadelphia in 1932, Fielding O Lewis5 also entertained the diagnosis of "acute edema of the larynx, secondary to a septic sore throat of a probable streptococci variety." In 1936, Creighton Barker6 published an analysis offering a similar diagnosis: "a virulent streptococcal infection of the pharynx, with cellulitis in the walls of the hypopharynx and edema of the glottis." In 1942, Willius and Keys1 considered membranous croup, acute laryngitis, and Ludwig's angina and concluded: "The modern American physician in all probability would execute the certificate of death in the following manner: septic sore throat, probably of streptococcic origin, associated with acute edema of the larynx."
http://xnet.kp.org/permanentejournal/spring04/time.html
There isn't always a simple answer and to pretend otherwise is, what would you say - a lie?
Washington died in 1799. His doctors had no knowledge whatever of streptococci. Later, much later, doctors speculate on what Washington might have had.
If he did have a streptococcal infection (strep throat to you), there would have been no treatment for it at the time, although one of the doctors apparently did suggest a tracheotomy, which actually might have saved his life.
Bleeding was not effective for his illness. It would have done no good whatsoever. However, the amount of blood removed from the President would have weakened him significantly, probably hastening his death.
Had he been alive after 1945, he would have received a penicillin shot and recovered quickly. Sadly, he lived in an essential pre-scientific period and died from being treated badly, even though no effective treatment was available to his physicians.
What later doctors have to say about what was probably wrong with Washington has no bearing on this discussion, though. He was bled by his doctors. He died. Science would have saved him, but he was born a bit too early for that.