Below I present the translation of Robert Malone's post, in which he summarizes a study by the home of Representatives Judiciary Committee on net censorship and interference in the elections made by the European Commission and the European Digital Services Act (DSA). We should at least get a summary of this report, due to the fact that it concerns freedom of speech and interference in elections in EU countries, including Poland.
Mainstream media tend to marginalize the problem or claim it does not exist. An excellent example of specified action is Note on Demagog.org.pl portal. It states that the news of the EU's interference in elections and censorship is not true, and that, of course, the statements of EU officials who, by definition, are always telling the fact are cited as proof.
The study of the home of Representatives Committee focuses on the impact of EC actions on freedom of speech in the US, which is understandable. At the same time, it exposes censorship mechanisms in the EU and reminds of interference in elections in EU countries. Just as Polish politicians have done nothing against the WHO pandemic pact, so they are now doing nothing about it. We were protected from WHO totalitarianism by president Trump's actions, but can we number on the U.S. as well? Like children, will we always anticipate individual else to defend our freedom?
Thank you for reading Substack Jack! Subscribe for free to receive fresh posts and support my work.
House study on EU Censorship and Election Intervention
Malone’s News
16 February 2026.
The following is simply a brief overview of the legislature report: "GLOBAL CONTRIBUTION GUARANTEE, PART II: EXERCISE FROM THE EUROPEAN CAMP FOR THE PRICE OF THE GLOBAL net AND HOW IT INJUNS THE AMERICAN TALK IN UNITED STATES". It comes from the interim study of the U.S. home of Representatives Judiciary Committee.
Here is simply a link to the full A 139-page study by the U.S. home of Representatives Judiciary Committee, published on 3 February 2026.
Here is simply a brief overview of its contents:
Review:
Title: ‘Foreign censorship threat, Part II: a decade-long European run to censor the global net and its impact on American speech in the United States’
Main findings:
This legislature investigation reveals how European Union bureaucrats have utilized the Digital Services Act (DSA) as a weapon to suppress freedom of speech on American technology platforms, silencing Americans in their own country.
Key points:
A decade of censorship: Since 2015, Brussels has built a censorship apparatus through the European net Forum, the Code of the Speech of hatred (2016) and the Code of Disinformation (2018) that prepared the ground under the DSA (2022).
Obeying the rules: "voluntary" EU codes were in fact completely different. Companies have faced a hard choice: to censor content or face severe financial penalties of up to 6% of global revenue.
Targeting Conservatives: EU regulatory authorities systematically suppressed legitimate political statements on COVID-19, vaccines, immigration, LGBTQ ideology, ‘populist rhetoric’, political satirism and ‘anti-government’ views.
American Censorship: As large technology companies apply a global content policy, European censorship demands the direct silence of American citizens within the US – which is simply a brazen attack on our rights guaranteed by the First Amendment.
Election manipulation: The European Union has interfered with elections around the world, including the US presidential election in 2024, putting force on platforms to suppress Conservative voices and manipulate election results.
Solid evidence: Court calls sent to 10 technological giants revealed thousands of papers proving the game of censorship.
Summary: This study proves that Brussels bureaucrats censor Americans and interfere in our elections. legislature must immediately take action to defend our constitutional rights from abroad censorship systems.
Interestingly, mainstream media almost completely ignored the report. The European newspapers focused on the fact that circumstantial officials were listed as censors and their names were not removed from the report. Horror!
SUMMARY:
US home of Representatives Judiciary Commission
3 February 2026.
The U.S. home of Representatives' Judiciary Committee examines how and to what degree abroad laws, regulations and judicial ordinances urge, force or influence companies to censor statements in the United States. As part of this supervision, the Commission has issued judicial calls to present papers to 10 technology companies, requiring them to supply communications on the moderation of content by governments of another countries, including the European Commission and associate States of the European Union (EU).
In July 2025, the Committee published a study detailing how the European Commission — the EU executive body — uses the Digital Services Act (DSA), the law governing online statements, to impose global censorship requirements on the net on political statements, humor and satire.
Since then, as requested in court, technology companies have presented thousands of interior papers and correspondence with the European Commission to the Committee. These papers show the scale and success of the European Commission's global censorship campaign. The European Commission, as part of a wide-ranging decade of action, has effectively put force on social media platforms to change its global principles of content moderation, thereby straight violating American freedom of expression online in the United States.
Although this has frequently been referred to as the fight against “talk of hatred” or “disinformation”, the European Commission sought to censor real information and political statements on any of the most crucial political debates in fresh history, including the COVID-19 pandemic, mass migration and transgender issues.
After 10 years, the European Commission has established adequate control over global freedom of expression on the net to effectively suppress narratives that endanger its rights. Before the court calls of the home of Representatives Committee, these actions were mainly held in secret. Now, for the first time, the European Commission has seen the light of day, informing the home of Representatives Committee about the legislative steps it can take to defend American freedom of expression on the Internet.
The DSA is the culmination of decades of efforts in Europe to silence political opposition and suppress online narratives criticizing the political establishment.
The DSA Act entered into force in 2023, and in December 2025 the European Commission imposed on Company X the first always fine under the DSA. Although the DSA Act has been in force for little than 3 years, the fine imposed on Company X crowns the decade-long efforts of the European Commission to control the global net and suppress adverse narratives on the network.
The net and social media initially promised to become a democratic speech force and with it political power. This improvement threatened the established political order, and in the mediate of the first decade of the 21st century the political establishment in the United States and Europe sought to counter the increasing populist movements, questioning profoundly unpopular strategies specified as mass migrations.
Recognising that it would take respective years to address this problem, the European Commission, starting in 2015, began to make various forums where European regulators could meet straight with technology platforms to discuss how and what content should be moderated.
Although they allegedly aimed to combat "disinformation" and "speak of hatred", the non-public papers presented to the Commission show that the European Commission has put direct force on platforms for the past 10 years to censor legitimate political statements in the European Union and abroad.
The EU net Forum (EUIF), established in 2015 by the Directorate-General for Migration and Home (DG Home) of the European Commission, was 1 of the first specified initiatives. By 2023, EUIF had published a "handbook... for the usage of technology companies during the moderation" of legitimate and non-violent freedom of expression, specified as:
‘Popular rhetoric’
‘Anti-government/anti-Union’ content
Anti-elite content
‘Political satire’
"Anti-immigrant and Islamophobic Content"
‘Anti-refugee/anti-immigrant sentiments’
«Anti-LGBTIQ content . . . .’ and
"Subculture of Memes".
The European Commission has besides enforced its censorship objectives through a supposedly voluntary “code of conduct” in hatred speech and disinformation. In 2016, the European Commission set up a "Code of Conduct to combat illegal hatred speech on the Internet", according to which platforms specified as Facebook, Instagram, TikTok and Twitter (now X) committed themselves to censoring vaguely defined "observations spreading hatred".
In 2018, a Code of Conduct on Disinformation was adopted, in which the same main platforms promised to “slow the visibility” of the alleged “disinformation”. During high-level meetings with platforms, high-ranking European Commission officials have made it clear to the platforms that Codes on hatred speech and disinformation aim to "fill the regulatory gap" until the EU can pass binding rules on "moderisation of content" on platforms.
Around the same time, the most powerful EU associate States, specified as Germany, began to introduce government on censorship at national level.
Later, in 2022, just before the entry into force of the DSA Act, the European Commission updated the Code of Disinformation of 2018. In line with the fresh guidelines, the platforms had to participate in the work of the "Working Group on Code of Disinformation", which was to meet regularly to discuss the approach of platforms to censor alleged misinformation. The Working squad has divided into six ‘subgroups’ focusing on circumstantial subjects related to disinformation, including verification of facts, elections and demotetization of conservative information services. Between 2022 and 2024, more than 90 meetings were held in all these sub-groups between platforms, censoring civilian society organisations (CSOs) and regulators of the European Commission.
These meetings were a key forum for regulators of the European Commission who put force on platforms to change the rules on content moderation and take additional steps in censorship. For example, at respective meetings of the Crisis consequence Sub-group, the European Commission asked about "policy changes" of platforms "related to combating misinformation".
The "voluntary" and "consensual" European censorship government is neither voluntary nor consensus based.
Both before and after the entry into force of the DSA Act, the European Commission has set up respective forums to cooperate regularly with content moderation platforms, including the Code of hatred Speech and the Code of Disinformation. These forums, together with more than 100 meetings, where regulators were able to exert force on platforms to more aggressively censor content, were allegedly voluntary and aimed at achieving "consensus" through the alleged regulatory dialogue. no of this was true. As the company’s interior e-mails uncover directly, the companies knew that ‘[not] they truly had a choice’ or that they would join these voluntary initiatives. And the European regulators led the presentation: the action plans were set "under a strong impulse from the European Commission", and the alleged "consensus" was achieved under strong force from the European Commission.
The European Commission has effectively put force on the largest social media platforms to change the world's principles of content moderation, a direct violation of freedom of expression online in the United States.
Most major social media platforms and video sharing platforms are based in the United States and have 1 global set of rules governing what content they can and cannot print on the website. These rules set limits to permitted discourse on the modern urban market, making it a key focus for regulators seeking to control narratives to strengthen their control of political power. Importantly, the principles of content moderation on platforms have – and must, in principle, have a global reach. Country-specific content placement poses a serious threat to privacy, requiring platforms to know and store information about the circumstantial location of each user whenever they log in.
At a time erstwhile users can freely usage virtual private networks (VPNs) to simulate their location and defend individual data, it is besides ineffective to average content in individual countries – and besides generates immense costs for platforms of any size. The net is global and the platforms regulate according to it. This means that the force of European regulators on social media companies to change the rules of content moderation affects what Americans can say and watch online in the United States. European censorship rules, which affect the principles of content moderation, so pose a direct threat to freedom of expression in the US.
A fewer years before the entry into force of the DSA Act, the European Commission made these principles of content moderation on platforms its main objective. During the COVID-19 pandemic, high-ranking European Commission officials pressed the platforms to change their rules on content moderation to global censorship of content undermining the narration of virus and vaccine. With the agreement of EU president Ursuli von der Leyen and Vice-President Vera Jourova, the European Commission asked the platforms how they plan to “update [...]... [its] conditions for the usage of services or practice of content moderation (advances/degradation)’ before introducing COVID-19 vaccines.
During the European Commission's censorship campaign, countless meetings devoted to the Code of Disinformation, the Code of hatred speech and the net Forum gave the European Commission more than 100 opportunities to put force on platforms to modify their rules of content moderation and to identify which online narratives on vaccines and another crucial policy themes should be censored. For example, in just 3 years, the European Commission has utilized more than a twelve meetings of the Crisis consequence Sub-group on the Code of Disinformation to push for platforms specified as YouTube and TikTok, on their "new developments and actions to combat misinformation", peculiarly with respect to "policy changes".
The force on platforms to comply with European censorship requirements increased further after the DSA Act was signed in October 2022. The European Commission has warned platforms that they request to change their global rules on content moderation to adapt to the DSA, otherwise they are facing a fine of up to six percent of global gross and a possible ban on access to the European market. This decade-long run of pressures has been successful: platforms have changed their principles of content moderation and censored statements worldwide in direct consequence to the DSA and the pressures of the European Commission. For example, in 2023 TikTok began editing its global Guidelines for communities whose clear goal is to "achieve compliance with the Digital Services Act".
New censorship rules came into force in 2024. In consequence to the ongoing decade of the European Commission's censorship campaign, TikTok introduced fresh rules for censorship of "marginalizing statements", including "coded statements", which "normalise unequal treatment", "disinformation undermining public confidence", "medias torn out of context" and "distorting reliable information". These standards are inherently subjective and easy exploited against the political opposition to the European Commission. In fact, these interior papers show that TikTok systematically censored real information worldwide to meet the European Commission's censorship requirements under the DSA Act. The paper describing these changes confirmed that, according to the ‘legal squad recommendations’, the updates ‘were mainly related to compliance with the Digital Services Act (DSA)’.
The papers indicate that this may not be the only changes in content moderation introduced in consequence to the DSA. During his presentation to the European Commission in July 2023, TikTok noted that "units whose regular activities overlap with DSA, specified as Trust & Safety... [have] received fresh policies, principles and [standard operating procedures]" to adapt to DSA. These interior papers propose that TikTok has changed much of its elaborate content moderation systems to adapt to the demands of the European Commission. The European Commission continues to focus on global principles of content moderation: in May 2025. The European Commission has clearly informed the platforms during the closed DSA workshops that a "continuous review of [global] community guidelines" is the best practice in compliance with DSA.
The European Commission focuses peculiarly on censorship of American content.
The European Commission has not only harmed American speech in the United States, putting force on platforms to change its global content moderation policy, but has besides deliberately sought to censor American content. These actions began during the COVID-19 pandemic. In November 2021, the European Commission requested information on how TikTok plans to "fight misinformation on the vaccination run against COVID-19 for children starting in the US", asking in peculiar about TikTok's plans to "remove" certain "recommendations" on the effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccine in children.
A year later, the European Commission's regulatory authorities put force on the platforms to remove the American documentary about vaccines, demanding that YouTube, Twitter and TikTok “check ... internally” and respond “in writing” why the movie was not censored. YouTube immediately replied to the European Commission, stating that it had “removed” the movie after the European Commission raised the issue. To put it plainly, the European Commission has treated the American debates on vaccination as part of its regulatory powers.
The focus of the European Commission on American statements was not limited to COVID-19 content. People nominated politically for top positions in the European Commission put force on TikTok to exacerbate censorship of American content before the US presidential election in 2024.
The most infamous is the fact that then EU Commissioner for the interior marketplace Thierry Breton sent a letter to owner X, Elon Musk, in August 2024, just before Musk interviewed president Donald Trump.
Breton threatened X with regulatory retaliation under the DSA for providing a live interview with president Trump in the United States, informing that the "movement" of American statements to the EU could prompt the Commission to take "retaliatory measures" against the X under the DSA. Breton threatened that the European Commission "will not hesitate to make full usage of [its] arsenal of tools" to silence this key American political statement. In consequence to Breton's threats, the Committee sent 2 letters in which it presented how his threats undermine freedom of speech in the United States and constitute interference in the US presidential election. shortly after, Breton resigned.
The European Commission has tried to minimize the importance of Breton's letter to Musk by presenting him as an unapproved, independent text from an unfair Commissioner acting alone. However, months before Commissioner Breton's letter, another high-ranking European Commission officials likewise pressed the directors of large technology companies to supply more information on how they planned to average election speeches before the US presidential election in 2024.
In May 2024, European Commission Vice-President Vera Jourova went to California to meet with representatives of major technology platforms. During this trip, Jourova met with TikToka's president, Shou Chew, and trust and safety manager to discuss topics specified as "preparations for elections". TikTok asked to confirm whether the Vice-President of the European Commission is going all the way to California for a gathering that "will focus mainly on the EU", or to discuss "both preparations for EU and US elections". The European Commission has confirmed that Vice-President Jourova wants to discuss "both topics".
The European Commission regularly interferes with national elections in EU associate States.
The European Commission seeks to influence EU associate States by monitoring political statements during the electoral period. Most strikingly, the European Commission issued the DSA Election Guidelines in 2024, requiring platforms to take additional censorship action before major European elections, specified as:
"Updating and improving policies, practices and algorithms" to bring them into line with EU censorship requirements;
Compliance with the ‘best practices’ set out in the Code against Disinformation, Code against hatred speech and EUIF documents;
‘Introducing measures to reduce the degree of misinformation’;
‘Adjusting their conditions and principles... in order to importantly reduce the coverage and impact of generational content in the field of artificial intelligence which presents misinformation or misinformation’;
‘labelling’ posts considered to be ‘disinformation’ by government-approved left-wing fact-checkers;
"Development and application of preventive measures that prevent opposition to possible and expected misinformation narratives"; and
Take additional steps to halt "sex-related disinformation".
These DSA Election Guidelines have been defined as voluntary, good practices. However, behind closed doors, the European Commission has made it clear that the Electoral Guidelines are mandatory. Prabhat Agarwal, Head of the Commission's DSA enforcement department, identified the Guidelines as the lower limit of compliance with the DSA, informing platforms that if they deviate from best practices they would gotta "have alternate measures that are equally good or better". Moreover, the European Commission's orders for electoral censorship are likely to have extraterritorial effects. For example, companies uncover in mandatory reports to the European Commission their standard "election policies, tools and processes". The European Commission regularly cooperates with large social media platforms to make changes to elections and organises discussions on DSA in non-EU countries.
Since the entry into force of the DSA Act in 2023. The European Commission has put force on platforms to censor content before the national elections in Slovakia, the Netherlands, France, Moldova, Romania and Ireland, and before the European Parliament elections in June 2024. The non-public papers presented to the Committee under a judicial call show how the European Commission has regularly put force on platforms before national elections in EU associate States to act against political parties with conservative or populist views.
The non-public agendas and readings show that the European Commission regularly convened meetings of national regulators, left-wing NGOs and platforms before the elections to discuss which political opinions should be censored. The European Commission has besides helped to organise "fast consequence systems" in which government-approved 3rd parties have the right to make precedence requests for censorship, aimed almost exclusively at the opposition of the ruling party. TikTok informed the European Commission that he had censored more than 45,000 alleged "disinformation", including clear political statements on issues specified as "migration, climate change, safety and defence and LGBTQ rights", before the European Parliament elections in 2024.
The 2023 elections in Slovakia are 1 of the key examples. TikTok's interior guidelines on content moderation show that TikTok censored the following "talk of hatred" in the face of the force of European censorship:
‘There are only 2 sexes’;
‘Children cannot be trans’;
"We must halt the sexualisation of young people/children";
"I believe that LGBTI ideology, sex ideology, transgender ideology pose a major threat to Slovakia, as well as corruption"; and
"Benefit sex Mistake".
These statements are not “a hatred speech” – they are political opinions on the current controversial technological and medical issue. TikTok himself noted that any of these political opinions were "common in Slovak political discussions". However, under force from the European Commission, TikTok censored these claims before the parliamentary elections in Slovakia.
The European Commission took the most aggressive censorship measures during the 2024 presidential elections in Romania. In December 2024, the Romanian Constitutional Court overturned the results of the first circular of presidential elections from the erstwhile month, winning by a little-known independent populist candidate, Calin Georgescu, after Romanian intelligence services accused Russia of secretly supporting Georgesc through a coordinated run on TikToku. TikTok's interior papers presented to the Commission seem to undermine this narrative. In letters to the European Commission, which utilized an unconfirmed accusation of Russian interference to analyse the practices of moderating content on TikTok, TikTok stated that "he had not found or provided him with any evidence of a coordinated network of 25,000 accounts linked to Mr Georgesc's campaign" – a key allegation put forward by intelligence services.
In late December 2024, media reports citing evidence from Romanian taxation authorities showed that the alleged Russian interference run was actually funded by another Romanian political party. However, the election results were never reinstated, and in May 2025 the candidate preferred by the establishment won the Romanian presidential election in the superiors of the election.
The European Commission continues to usage DSA as a weapon to censor content outside its borders.
After a decade of censorship, the European Commission continues to break Europe's historical commitment to freedom of speech. In December 2025, the European Commission imposed the first fine under the Digital Services Act, imposing an full litany of absurd violations on platform X, which was clearly a pretext for punishing the platform for defending freedom of expression.
The European Commission has imposed a fine of EUR 120 million on Company X – just below the statutory limit of six percent of global gross – for alleged infringements, including the "abuse" of the importance of blue selection markers by changing the way they are awarded. Moreover, despite the European Commission's protests that the DSA Act only applies in the EU, its decision on X enforced the DSA in an extraterritorial way. The decision stated that according to DSA's decision to access technological data, company X, which is an American company, must transfer American data to researchers around the planet – all due to European law. The European Commission has besides threatened to ban X's activities within the EU if it does not comply with its demands for censorship.
The European Commission's decision to impose a fine on X is appalling for at least 2 different reasons: it punishes X for global defence of freedom of speech and claims the right to enforce the DSA law worldwide. That is all that the Committee has warned against for over a year.
The 2 fresh EU initiatives besides endanger to aggravate the crisis of freedom of expression in Europe. As part of president von der Leyen's initiative "Tarcza Democracy", the European Commission will set up at least 2 fresh censorship centres where regulators and left-wing NGOs can put force on platforms to censor conservative content – the European Democratic opposition Centre and the European Network of Facts Verifiers. As part of the same proposal, the European Commission is seeking to extend the Code of Disinformation to include requirements for "user verification tools", which could effectively put an end to anonymity on the net by requiring an identity paper to be provided to establish an account. The Commission is besides seeking to circumvent average democratic processes in order to make a single, broad definition of illegal "hate speech" across Europe. This would require the adoption by all EU associate States of a Commission definition that includes conventional political discourse and "memes". The threat from censorship in Europe shows no signs of weakening.
The Committee is investigating abroad laws, regulations and judgments concerning censorship due to the risks they pose to American freedom of expression in the United States. In particular, the EU DSA Act poses a serious threat to American freedom of speech online: The European Commission has deliberately exerted force on technology companies to change their global policy to average content, as well as deliberately attacking American freedom of speech and elections. The European Commission's extraterritorial actions straight undermine American sovereignty. The Committee will proceed to make legislative solutions to defend itself against this existential threat to the most precious rights of Americans and to effectively address this threat.
CONCLUSION
.
