> Most of this was revealed by mainstream journalists

No, most of this was ignored by mainstream US journalists, and the mainstream journalists who still insisted on talking about them were pushed out of the mainstream. Journalists like Judith Miller at the notoriously conservative NYT (a woman who was made to take the blame for everything for some reason) were the face of the mainstream.

The only distinction that makes journalism "mainstream," at least in the US, is a running mutual relationship with the administration and intelligence agencies. Not circulation, not profitability, not influence, not truthfulness of reporting, nor quality of reporting. "Mainstream" outlets float government narratives crediting anonymous sources or sources delivered to the outlet on a platter. They also consult with the government and intelligence agencies before publishing stories, and will avoid entire subjects or questions on request. They do this in exchange for accurate inside information and scoops, or external benefits for the owners of the outlets.

The vast majority of Democrats energetically supported the WMD lie, although it was false on its face based on the reports of the inspectors, and the fact that the documents used to justify it were obvious frauds ("The Dirty Dossier"). The rest was from "Curveball" who was an obvious fraud with an ulterior motive from the first encounter, and who no one ever bothered to corroborate, but who offered what the people who sell war material (and the politicians they fund) were buying.

Democrats ridiculed us, too. All but one of them voted for the war, and they still marginalize her for it.

This personal identification with Democrats among certain people seems to wash away all of their actual votes and rhetoric. Every problem becomes about how evil Republicans are, and no rational reason is ever offered for that evil, because all of the rational reasons (corruption, ambition) apply as easily to their Democratic counterparts. I found a name for those people during the Trump impeachment: "emoluments libs." They were the people who insisted that the Democrats weren't impeaching on emoluments because they weren't brave enough and weren't really trying, rather than because any investigation into Trump taking advantage of his office for cash would in the end implicate most of Congress to a greater extent than Trump, who was an outsider in a bad position to make the kind of money that old masters get up to.

The idea that Tony Blair is the face of conservatism is laughable. Obama taking over the wars was ideal for people who made money from them, because they had become too closely associated with US religious warriors who were trying to put clothes on naked statues. You needed an Obama to indemnify the worldwide black site torture program and the intentional destruction of the evidence of it, to continue PATRIOT and to indemnify the companies that surveilled their customers, and to continue to prosecute those wars.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Curveball_(informant)

Iraq War's Authorization by Congress Is Still on the Books and Dangerously Open-Ended

https://foreignpolicy.com/2023/09/28/iraq-war-aumf-authority...