X has surged in popularity after the European Union announced last week that it had fined the social media platform for violating transparency rules and other regulations.
Elon Musk, who purchased X in 2022, has celebrated X’s surging popularity and mocked the European Union’s attempts to punish the free speech platform. Musk has touted rankings that show X has become the most downloaded app across Europe since the EU announced its action against Musk’s platform.
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">
Now number 1 in every EU country! <a href="https://t.co/tQOpiPVRkw">https://t.co/tQOpiPVRkw</a>
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) <a href="https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1997726311754989762?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">December 7, 2025</a></blockquote>
“X is seeing record-breaking downloads in many countries in Europe,” Musk <a href="https://x.com/elonmusk/status/1997710799440429292">posted</a> on Sunday.
“The European Union is not DEMOcracy–rule of the people–but rather BUREAUcracy–rule of the unelected bureaucrat!” Musk added in a <a href="https://x.com/elonmusk/status/1997711558508695979">post</a> several minutes later.
The European Commission, the main governing body of the European Union, announced on Friday that it had <a href="https://x.com/EU_Commission/status/1996968219286904832">fined</a> X the equivalent of about $140 million for “non-compliance with transparency obligations under the [Digital Services Act].”
The commission <a href="https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/ip_25_2934">said</a> that X’s “blue checkmark” stamp on accounts, which is given to those accounts that pay for verification, is deceptive. The commission also accused X of illegally blocking researchers and governments from accessing parts of its data.
50% off DailyWire+ annual memberships will not return for another year, so don’t miss this deal! Join now at <a class="c-link" href="http://dailywire.com/cyberweek" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" data-stringify-link="http://DailyWire.com/cyberweek" data-sk="tooltip_parent">DailyWire.com/cyberweek</a>.
In a response from X’s head of product, Nikita Bier accused the commission of hypocrisy, exploiting a bug in X’s platform for advertisements to extend the reach of the commission’s video announcing its action against X. Bier said that X has since cut off the commission’s access to X’s Ad Composer tool for using it to deceive users.
“The irony of your announcement: You logged into your dormant ad account to take advantage of an exploit in our Ad Composer — to post a link that deceives users into thinking it’s a video and to artificially increase its reach,” Bier <a href="https://x.com/nikitabier/status/1997450541275005041">posted</a>. “As you may be aware, X believes everyone should have an equal voice on our platform. However, it seems you believe that the rules should not apply to your account. Your ad account has been terminated.”
Bier’s response was reposted by Musk.
The commission’s action against Musk has riled top officials in the Trump administration, deepening a divide between the United States and Europe over regulation and speech.
“The European Commission’s $140 million fine isn’t just an attack on [X], it’s an attack on all American tech platforms and the American people by foreign governments. The days of censoring Americans online are over,” <a href="https://x.com/SecRubio/status/1996974377003319667">said</a> Secretary of State Marco Rubio.
“The EU should be supporting free speech not attacking American companies over garbage,” <a href="https://x.com/JDVance/status/1996701953372704921">said</a> Vice President JD Vance a day before the fine was announced.

Elon Musk

X Users Skyrocket After European Union Targets Musk With $140M Fine

Big Tech

European Union

Global Politics

JD Vance

Marco Rubio

World

The European Union fined Elon Musk&#8217;s X $140 million on Friday as the bloc targets American social media companies under its expansive internet accountability regulations.
The European Commission, which is the European Union&#8217;s executive branch, <a href="https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/ip_25_2934">accused</a> Elon Musk&#8217;s company of deceiving its users, failing to meet advertising transparency requirements, and failing to give researchers access to the platform&#8217;s data. The commission argues that X violated its Digital Services Act, regulations put into place in 2022 that are designed to clamp down on what it views as illegal content and misinformation on social media.
Before the fine was officially announced, Vice President JD Vance ripped the European Union for planning to impose the penalties against X.
&#8220;Rumors swirling that the EU commission will fine X hundreds of millions of dollars for not engaging in censorship. The EU should be supporting free speech not attacking American companies over garbage,&#8221; Vance <a href="https://x.com/JDVance/status/1996701953372704921">wrote</a>.
Secretary of State Marco Rubio <a href="https://x.com/SecRubio/status/1996974377003319667">added</a>, &#8220;The European Commission’s $140 million fine isn’t just an attack on @X, it’s an attack on all American tech platforms and the American people by foreign governments. The days of censoring Americans online are over.&#8221;
The European Commission&#8217;s top complaint against X on Friday is that the social media company allows any user to &#8220;obtain the ‘verified&#8217; status without the company meaningfully verifying who is behind the account, making it difficult for users to judge the authenticity of accounts and content they engage with.&#8221; The commission said that the Digital Services Act does not require platforms to verify users, but added that the regulation &#8220;clearly prohibits online platforms from falsely claiming that users have been verified, when no such verification took place.&#8221;
&#8220;Deceiving users with blue checkmarks, obscuring information on ads and shutting out researchers have no place online in the EU,&#8221; said Henna Virkkunen, the executive vice president for Tech Sovereignty, Security and Democracy.&#8221; DSA protects users. The DSA gives researchers the way to uncover potential threats. The DSA restores trust in the online environment. With the DSA’s first non-compliance decision, we are holding X responsible for undermining users’ rights and evading accountability.&#8221;
Musk also responded to the commission&#8217;s complaint, writing on X that his goal with X&#8217;s verification system &#8220;was to democratize verification, rather than have it be controlled by a group of biased elites!&#8221;
The European Union&#8217;s move against X was condemned by the U.S. Federal Communications Commission, with FCC Chair Brendan Carr saying that Europe is &#8220;taxing Americans.&#8221;
&#8220;Once again, Europe is fining a successful U.S. tech company for being a successful U.S. tech company,&#8221; Carr <a href="https://x.com/BrendanCarrFCC/status/1996945925822939407">said</a>. &#8220;Europe is taxing Americans to subsidize a continent held back by Europe’s own suffocating regulations.&#8221;
Conservatives have argued that the Digital Services Act is a way for Europe to clamp down on free speech, even for Americans.
“The DSA can impact anyone, can impact content creators and influencers and preachers and political dissidents and any kind of content online can be regulated by the DSA through its architecture,” Dr. Adina Portaru, a senior counsel for Alliance Defending Freedom International, told <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/europe-union-ignored-free-speech-concerns-plows-ahead-with-global-censorship-regime">The Daily Wire</a> earlier this year.
X was given 60 days to inform the European Commission of how it plans to address the issues laid out by the bloc. The social media platform has 90 days to submit an &#8220;action plan&#8221; to the commission, and the Board of Digital Services will then have one month to issue its opinion and another month to release its final decision.

E.U./X/JD Vance

‘Engaging In Censorship’: European Union Hits Elon Musk’s X With Massive Fine, Draws White House Ire

'Engaging In Censorship': European Union Hits Elon Musk's X With Massive Fine, Draws White House Ire

Social Media

The European Commission “ignored” censorship concerns as it moved forward with the implementation of a sweeping digital platform law that free speech advocates say could impact everyone from Christian preachers to TikTokers.
On Monday, the European Commission <a href="https://digital-strategy.ec.europa.eu/en/library/report-application-article-33-regulation-eu-20222065-dsa-and-interaction-regulation-other-legal" target="_blank" rel="noopener">released</a> its first-ever review of the Digital Services Act (DSA), a law that empowers it to impose significant financial penalties on tech companies that it says are not doing enough to combat so-called disinformation or take down “illegal content.” Alliance Defending Freedom International, which <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/for-thursday-exclusive-free-speech-advocates-challenge-eu-over-pan-european-censorship-regime" target="_blank" rel="noopener">has warned</a> that the Digital Services Act could bring about a “global censorship regime,”  told The Daily Wire that it was disappointed with the commission’s report.
“I think the concerns on free speech are very substantive, and they need a robust response, and we feel that the European Commission has not actually conducted a robust review in the sense of actually inviting all voices and all partners to the table,” Dr. Adina Portaru, a senior counsel for Alliance Defending Freedom International, told The Daily Wire in a phone interview from London.
“The DSA can impact anyone, can impact content creators and influencers and preachers and political dissidents and any kind of content online can be regulated by the DSA through its architecture,” she added.
The act relies on cooperation from non-governmental organizations that advise lawmakers whether someone’s online writings would be considered illegal. There would also be a high burden for reporting violations on tech companies. In certain circumstances, American tech companies may be fined up to 6% of their global revenue if they violate specific conditions.
The Monday assessment from the European Commission asserts that the act is in accordance with the “fundamental rights” recognized in the commission’s charter and that the act is “content agnostic.”
“It does not define what should be considered illegal or harmful content, it only establishes procedural obligations and safeguards where such content appears online,” the assessment said.
Portaru said that the “content agnostic” claim was a smokescreen and that the definition of illegal content in the act was broad enough to have global implications.
“Illegal content is defined in such a loose way as anything that is not in accordance with EU law or any law of any member state at any time. It can be today or in one week, depending on how the national laws change,” she said.
The Alliance Defending Freedom International led a letter signed by over 100 free speech experts in October urging the European Commission to address their concerns with the act. Another 50 non-governmental organizations signed a letter in September expressing concerns about the act.
Instead of bringing them to the table, the commission claimed to have broad consensus around the act when it was actually interpreted unilaterally, Portaru said.
“The European Commission had the opportunity to step into this space and constructively engage with these concerns coming from the U.S, as well as Europeans,&#8221; she said. &#8220;It failed to do so.&#8221;
<div id="message-list_1763648784.748159" class="c-virtual_list__item" tabindex="0" role="listitem" aria-setsize="-1" data-qa="virtual-list-item" data-item-key="1763648784.748159">
<div class="c-message_kit__background c-message_kit__background--hovered p-message_pane_message__message c-message_kit__message" role="presentation" data-qa="message_container" data-qa-unprocessed="false" data-qa-placeholder="false">
<div class="c-message_kit__hover c-message_kit__hover--hovered" role="document" aria-roledescription="message" data-qa-hover="true">
<div class="c-message_kit__actions c-message_kit__actions--default">
<div class="c-message_kit__gutter">
<div class="c-message_kit__gutter__right" role="presentation" data-qa="message_content">
<div class="c-message_kit__blocks c-message_kit__blocks--rich_text">
<div class="c-message__message_blocks c-message__message_blocks--rich_text" data-qa="message-text">
<div class="p-block_kit_renderer" data-qa="block-kit-renderer">
<div class="p-block_kit_renderer__block_wrapper p-block_kit_renderer__block_wrapper--first">
<div class="p-rich_text_block" dir="auto">
<div class="p-rich_text_section">Asked about whether the commission was concerned about free speech, Portaru said &#8220;they just simply ignored it.&#8221;</div>
<div></div>
<div class="p-rich_text_section">The commission did respond to Alliance Defending Freedom International in a November 14 letter viewed by The Daily Wire that claimed it was committed to “upholding the right to freedom of expression and information” and asserting that the act was content neutral.</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
“The DSA ensures that lawful content protected by the fundamental right of freedom of expression, is safeguarded by establishing due process and transparency online. The DSA clarifies what online platforms are required to do when they moderate content to prevent the arbitrary removal of lawful content,” the commission wrote.
In a statement to The Daily Wire, a spokesman for the European Commission claimed that concerns about censorship were “completely unfounded.”
“The aim of our digital legislation, including the DSA, is to ensure that the Internet is a safe place. One that protects our fundamental rights. One where illegal content like terrorism or child abuse have no place,” the spokesman said, adding that online platforms have a role to “assess and mitigate risks to the freedom of expression.”
The spokesman added that the act provided a mechanism for people to challenge if their content has been removed.
Despite the European Commission’s claims, American officials have raised concerns about how the Digital Services Act could impact the United States. The State Department told The Daily Wire that it was reviewing the report on the Digital Services Act with &#8220;great interest.&#8221;
&#8220;Current EU laws, like the Digital Services Act, exacerbate concerning member-state speech laws that use vague language such as “harmful content” to target disfavored political and religious speech and can impose onerous financial burdens on U.S. companies seeking to do business in European markets,&#8221; a State Department spokesman told The Daily Wire. &#8220;European regulations such as the DSA can have outsized extraterritorial effects and place a disproportionate burden on major American technology platforms.&#8221;
&#8220;The United States believes that protecting freedom of expression is critical, particularly for any democratic, self-governing nation – this includes protecting voices that challenge the status quo or criticize the government,&#8221; the spokesman added. 
In September, European Union Ambassador Andrew Puzder said that he would be making formal submissions to the commission for changes to the act.
“The Europeans believe that [the rules] are less restrictive and less targeted than the U.S. believes, and I think we’re going to need to sit down and go through these acts with some care,” he <a href="https://www.ft.com/content/b6d9fb9c-901e-42e3-9610-5a449247fd49" target="_blank" rel="noopener">told</a> the Financial Times.
That followed reports in August that Secretary of State Marco Rubio had <a href="https://www.reuters.com/sustainability/society-equity/rubio-orders-us-diplomats-launch-lobbying-blitz-against-europes-tech-law-2025-08-07/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">directed</a> diplomats to lobby against the Digital Services Act.
&#8220;Posts should focus efforts to build host government and other stakeholder support to repeal and/or amend the DSA or related EU or national laws restricting expression online,&#8221; Rubio wrote in a cable obtained by Reuters.
Apart from broader censorship concerns, many European countries have already become notorious for restrictions placed on political and religious speech. For example, Finnish parliamentarian <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/the-bible-on-trial-christian-politician-goes-back-to-court-over-religious-beliefs" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Päivi Räsänen</a> has faced a six-year-long legal battle for conveying her beliefs in Christian views of sexuality online. Pro-life advocates have been punished in Britain for silently praying and German citizens <a href="https://nypost.com/2025/02/21/world-news/germans-cant-insult-politicians-which-is-why-we-need-to-protect-free-speech-in-the-us/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">can</a> be punished for insulting politicians.

BELGIUM-EU-POLITICS

Europe Union ‘Ignored’ Free Speech Concerns, Plows Ahead With ‘Global Censorship Regime’

Alliance Defending Freedom (ADF)

Censorship

Free Speech

State Department

American voters want President Donald Trump&#8217;s administration to use trade leverage to protect American businesses from European Union regulations, according to a new poll first shared with The Daily Wire.
The <a href="https://eu-usforum.com/" target="_blank" rel="noopener" data-saferedirecturl="https://www.google.com/url?q=https://eu-usforum.com/&amp;source=gmail&amp;ust=1763480980517000&amp;usg=AOvVaw2A1Ns3BfuiQLCZTutD9Sg1">EU-US Forum</a> surveyed likely general election voters and found that Americans view two specific European Union directives — the Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive and the Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive — as bad for American businesses at home. The EU-US Forum is an American nonprofit organization working to advance the president&#8217;s agenda in Europe and combat &#8220;the EU’s radical leftism.&#8221;
&#8220;Our latest national survey of likely general election voters in America shows that they view the European Union’s environmental, social, and governance (ESG) regulations as unfair to American companies, chiefly because they expect these rules to raise costs and hurt American competitiveness,&#8221; the forum said in a release.
<a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/americans-want-trump-to-use-trade-leverage-to-protect-american-businesses-poll-finds/screenshot-2025-11-18-at-11-43-53-am" rel="attachment wp-att-1002275"><img loading="lazy" decoding="async" class="alignnone wp-image-1002275 size-large" src="https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/11/Screenshot-2025-11-18-at-11.43.53-AM-1024x342.png" alt="" width="1024" height="342" srcset="https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/11/Screenshot-2025-11-18-at-11.43.53-AM-1024x342.png 1024w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/11/Screenshot-2025-11-18-at-11.43.53-AM-300x100.png 300w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/11/Screenshot-2025-11-18-at-11.43.53-AM-768x256.png 768w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/11/Screenshot-2025-11-18-at-11.43.53-AM-1536x513.png 1536w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/11/Screenshot-2025-11-18-at-11.43.53-AM-2048x684.png 2048w" sizes=" (max-width: 1024px) 100vw, 1024px" /></a>
&#8220;A clear majority want the Trump administration to protect U.S. companies from the Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive (CSRD) and the Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive (CS3D) by using ongoing trade negotiations as leverage to shield American companies from EU overreach,&#8221; they shared. &#8220;Elected officials who support President Trump in his leadership to confront CSRD and CS3D in trade negotiations stand to benefit politically, as voters say they are more likely to re-elect lawmakers who fight to free U.S. businesses from excessive European regulation.&#8221;
Almost six in 10 Americans surveyed said that it is important for American officials to use trade negotiations in order to roll back the European Union&#8217;s ESG regulations on American companies, according to the poll, conducted via an internet panel between November 11 and 12 with a margin of error of +/-3%.
<a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/americans-want-trump-to-use-trade-leverage-to-protect-american-businesses-poll-finds/screenshot-2025-11-18-at-11-44-05-am" rel="attachment wp-att-1002279"><img loading="lazy" decoding="async" class="alignnone wp-image-1002279 size-large" src="https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/11/Screenshot-2025-11-18-at-11.44.05-AM-1024x469.png" alt="" width="1024" height="469" srcset="https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/11/Screenshot-2025-11-18-at-11.44.05-AM-1024x469.png 1024w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/11/Screenshot-2025-11-18-at-11.44.05-AM-300x137.png 300w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/11/Screenshot-2025-11-18-at-11.44.05-AM-768x352.png 768w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/11/Screenshot-2025-11-18-at-11.44.05-AM-1536x704.png 1536w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/11/Screenshot-2025-11-18-at-11.44.05-AM-2048x939.png 2048w" sizes=" (max-width: 1024px) 100vw, 1024px" /></a>
Fifty-seven percent of those surveyed said the European Union regulations would unfairly impact United States businesses. Fifty-two percent of those surveyed said they would be more likely to vote for a member of Congress who pushes the president to use trade negotiations to stop the European Union from putting strict ESG regulations on American companies. Seventy-one percent said that the European Union&#8217;s compliance regulations would raise costs on American families. Seventy-two percent think that the reporting requirements would be problematic for smaller U.S. suppliers.
The EU-US Forum argues that their polling shows that the EU directives are unfair for American businesses and will be expensive for American families and that the Trump administration should use its trade leverage to stop them. They also argue that lawmakers who align with the president&#8217;s agenda &#8220;stand on solid political ground and can credibly claim they are protecting American workers, businesses, and exporters from Europe’s red tape agenda.&#8221;
The Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive <a href="https://finance.ec.europa.eu/capital-markets-union-and-financial-markets/company-reporting-and-auditing/company-reporting/corporate-sustainability-reporting_en">requires large companies to share information</a> on &#8220;what they see as the risks and opportunities arising from social and environmental issues, and on the impact of their activities on people and the environment.&#8221; The alleged goal is to help investors, stakeholders, and civil society organizations to evaluate &#8220;the sustainability performance of companies as part of the European green deal.&#8221;
Along similar lines, the Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive <a href="https://www.corporate-sustainability-due-diligence-directive.com/">gives companies</a> an &#8220;obligation&#8221; to &#8220;conduct appropriate human rights and environmental due diligence&#8221; with &#8220;respect to their operations, operations of their subsidiaries, and operations of their business partners in companies’ chains of activities.&#8221;

NATO Summit In The Hague Final Day

Americans Want Trump To Use Trade Leverage To Protect American Businesses, Poll Finds

Donald Trump

Europe

Secretary of State Marco Rubio ripped into European officials on Wednesday for criticizing U.S. strikes against drug boats in the Caribbean Sea and Pacific Ocean.
Rubio hit back at critics of U.S. foreign policy regarding drug trafficking in the Western hemisphere while speaking to reporters at a G-7 gathering.
“I don&#8217;t think that the European Union gets to determine what international law is. What they certainly don&#8217;t get to determine is how the United States defends its national security,” <a href="https://x.com/EricLDaugh/status/1988744278831472895">said</a> Rubio when asked about criticisms from some in the EU. “The United States is under attack from organized, criminal narcoterrorists in our hemisphere, and the president is responding in the defense of our country.”
The Secretary of State suggested that the United States’ European critics are hypocrites as they try to balance their desire for American aid and armaments to help Ukraine in its war against Russia with their more conservative attitudes regarding Latin American cartels and drug trafficking.
“I do find it interesting that all these countries want us to send and supply, for example, nuclear-capable Tomahawk missiles to defend Europe, but when the United States positions aircraft carriers in our hemisphere, where we live, somehow that&#8217;s a problem?” Rubio asked rhetorically.
“I would say that the United States and this president has made very clear his job is to protect the United States from threats against the United States, and that is what he is doing in this operation,” he said.
The U.S. military has stationed several aircraft carriers with a fleet of warships and other war machinery in the Caribbean Sea off the coast of Venezuela and in the Pacific Ocean to cut off water smuggling routes used by drug cartels. The United States has destroyed roughly 20 boats and submarines so far that the administration has said were being used to smuggle drugs such as fentanyl and cocaine in the United States.
Some officials of U.S. allies have expressed concern at the killings, claiming that the <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/does-the-president-have-the-authority-to-strike-venezuelan-drug-boats">strikes</a> violate “international law” and should be stopped. The United Kingdom has <a href="https://www.cnn.com/2025/11/11/politics/uk-suspends-caribbean-intelligence-sharing-us">reportedly</a> stopped sharing intelligence with the United States related to drug trafficking in South America to avoid involvement in the strikes.
French Foreign Minister Jean-Noël Barrot was more explicit in his criticism. He told reporters at the G-7 summit in Canada that the U.S. “military operations in the Caribbean region … violate international law” and could destabilize the region, according to <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/national-security/2025/11/12/g-7-rubio-drug-boats-venezuela/">The Washington Post</a>.

Marco Rubio Rips EU Critics Who Claim Drug Boat Strikes Violate ‘International Law’

France

In 1946, not too long after the end of World War II, Winston Churchill famously spoke of a “special relationship” between the United Kingdom and the United States — not only as a bond of history and language, but as a partnership grounded in shared principles and moral duty. That same sense of duty must guide us today as we confront the world’s leading state sponsor of terror: the clerical regime in Iran.
Historically, when facing totalitarian regimes, Britain, the US, and other Western powers have placed local dissidents at the center of any discussion about the future of oppressed nations. Yet Iran remains a glaring exception. For reasons that defy logic and morality, successive governments have marginalized the voices of Iranian democrats.
I am one of a growing number of Western politicians on both sides of the Atlantic who believe this should change and to this end, I will speak at the Free Iran Convention in Washington, D.C., on November 15, where more than one thousand Iranian experts, professionals, and academicians from all over the US, will present their vision for a free, democratic Iran.
For nearly half a century, Western policy toward Tehran has prioritized negotiation over accountability, assuming the clerical regime’s grip on power was unshakeable. Many believed Iran’s rulers would never meet the same fate as the Shah — at least not without chaos in the absence of a viable alternative.
That assumption was flawed from the outset. In the immediate aftermath of the 1979 revolution, the forces that helped topple the Shah — chief among them the People’s Mojahedin Organization of Iran (PMOI/MEK) — remained active, popular, and determined to oppose the theocracy that hijacked the revolution’s promise. The regime responded with brutal repression throughout the 1980s, culminating in the horrific 1988 massacre of around 30,000 political prisoners, most of them MEK members and supporters.
This atrocity was meant to eliminate organized opposition once and for all. It failed. The MEK survived and went on to form the backbone of the National Council of Resistance of Iran (NCRI), a broad coalition advocating regime change and democratic transition. Yet, tragically, the massacre convinced much of the international community that internal resistance had been extinguished — and that engagement with Tehran was the only realistic path forward.
Encouraged by that misperception (echoed by the regime’s protagonists and lobbyists), the regime deepened its repression at home and aggression abroad. It became the world’s leading state sponsor of terrorism, the nation with the highest per-capita rate of executions, and the only non-nuclear-armed state enriching uranium to 60% purity — just short of weapons-grade.
Ironically, by assuming the regime’s permanence, Western leaders helped create a situation where regime change has become essential for global security and human rights. Some progress is evident: the UK, France, and Germany recently triggered the re-imposition of UN sanctions following Washington’s return to a “maximum pressure” strategy.
But it remains unclear whether today’s policymakers grasp how profoundly their predecessors misread the regime’s vulnerability.
That misunderstanding can no longer be excused. Three nationwide uprisings — in 2018, 2019, and 2022 — have shown the Iranian people’s enduring commitment to democratic change. The unity and persistence of their demands reveal the strength of an organized opposition that, despite deadly crackdowns and decades of dismissal by Western analysts, continues to challenge the regime from within.
The Free Iran Convention in Washington builds on this momentum. It follows major gatherings in Brussels and across Europe, where Iranian youth and dissidents reaffirmed their readiness for a democratic transition. The movement’s supporters will call for a coherent Western policy — one that recognizes the NCRI as a credible alternative and supports the Iranian people’s right to determine their future.
Many of us in public life have already joined this cause. In parliaments on both sides of the Atlantic, lawmakers have endorsed resolutions recognizing the NCRI as a legitimate democratic alternative to the current regime and affirming the Iranian people’s right to establish a secular, non-nuclear republic. Maryam Rajavi, the President-elect of the NCRI, has articulated a ten-point plan as a roadmap for a future democratic republic of Iran. It has gained cross-party support of the majority of members of both the US House of Representatives and the UK House of Commons.
It is time for policymakers to act accordingly. The UK and European Union must designate the IRGC as a terrorist organization, and democratic governments should hold Tehran’s leaders accountable for crimes against humanity. Most importantly, the West must acknowledge the Iranian people’s right to overthrow tyranny and build a democratic future.
Appeasement has never delivered stability. Courage, clarity, and solidarity with the Iranian people just might.
* * *
Rt. Hon. John Bercow was the Speaker of the UK House of Commons from 2009 to 2019.
The views expressed in this piece are those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of The Daily Wire.

Protest Against U.S. Attacks On Iran

It’s Time To Challenge Tehran’s Illusion Of Strength With Reality

Ayatollah Ali Khamenei

Democracy

Great Britain

Iran

Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps

Middle East

Radical Islamic Terror

When President Trump took to Truth Social to <a href="https://truthsocial.com/@realDonaldTrump/posts/115370746210555899">promote</a> Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni’s new book, “I Am Giorgia,” many may have viewed it as a natural alliance between two champions of national pride, family values, and strong leadership. Trump praised Meloni as an inspiration, highlighting her dedication to faith, family, and country — qualities he has always deeply valued.
However, the public display of friendship and affection stands in stark contrast to recent moves by the Italian government to harm American businesses. In fact, its recent policy decisions are quietly undermining a vital element of Trump’s economic strategy with Europe — particularly the principle against unfair, targeted fees on America’s innovators in the tech and telecom sectors.
The Italian bureaucracy, through Italy’s telecom authority AGCOM, has recently taken <a href="https://ccianet.org/news/2025/09/italys-move-towards-network-fees-sets-blueprint-for-eu-under-digital-networks-act-study-finds/">steps</a> that classify Content Delivery Networks as part of Italy’s national telecom infrastructure. This may seem like a technical regulatory shift, but it sets a dangerous precedent for forcing U.S.-based streaming giants like Netflix and YouTube to shoulder <a href="https://www.euractiv.com/news/italys-telecoms-regulator-walks-fine-line-between-meloni-trump-and-brussels-over-network-fees/">new costs</a>.
The idea that such platforms should pay what Europe calls “network fees” was repeatedly rejected by Brussels to avoid sparking a trade war with the United States. Yet Italy’s move appears to be a sneaky attempt to backdoor these fees through regulation rather than overt legislation.
That makes this latest maneuver particularly troubling in light of the U.S.–EU trade deal framework, which explicitly commits Europe to refraining from imposing network fees or equivalent measures that target American digital services. That commitment was celebrated as a breakthrough for fair and open digital trade — and a win for both sides of the Atlantic. Italy’s proposal represents a direct and duplicitous workaround of that agreement and should not be tolerated by either Meloni or President Trump.
The problem runs deeper than just economic policy. President Trump has always insisted that America should be treated fairly and that U.S. companies should not be subjected to unfair financial penalties while European companies enjoy protection. The essence of Trump’s “America First” trade approach is not just about tariffs but standing up to Europe’s habit of disguising predatory actions as “fairness” or “sovereignty.” Time and again, European bureaucrats have tried to charm American leadership with lofty rhetoric while quietly pursuing policies that simultaneously penalize U.S. tech innovators in favor of incumbent European firms and <a href="https://strandconsult.dk/is-there-a-correlation-between-european-nations-level-of-chinese-telecom-equipment-the-consumption-of-russian-energy-and-military-aid-to-ukraine/">hand over</a> their purportedly sacred sovereignty to Chinese companies.
In fact, in Italy’s case, more than a third of its 5G infrastructure is supplied by China. And the country’s largest telecom provider, Telecom Italia (TIM), has <a href="https://www.linkedin.com/posts/pietro-labriola_digitale-innovazione-sostenibilitaeq-activity-7383556923331162112-xRkN/?utm_source=share&amp;utm_medium=member_desktop&amp;rcm=ACoAAACcXXMBcipZDNsVQ3AlxVNbqOAKXKgu_r0">deep ties</a> with other countries at the center of <a href="https://dailycaller.com/2025/10/13/john-czwartacki-brazil-is-waging-war-on-american-technology-with-chinas-help/">China’s scheme</a> to drive a wedge between the United States and our allies across the Atlantic and in our own backyard. 
The regulatory maneuvers of Meloni’s government are out of step with her public embrace of Trump’s values. She claims to stand for independence and patriotism, yet by empowering AGCOM to impose regulatory costs on American tech, she works within the same globalist, big government EU framework that Trump himself has warned against. This contradiction should raise alarms on both sides of the Atlantic. Supporting a populist vision in politics means little if the policies implemented to bring it to fruition end up stifling competition and reducing consumer welfare.
Italy’s approach to network fees could also spark retaliatory measures that hurt Italian and European interests in the process. Real partnership demands more than symbolic displays of loyalty. It requires shared commitment to open markets, fair competition, and the removal of hidden barriers.
Europe’s temptation to manipulate U.S. leaders through false promises while it advances onerous regulatory measures designed to impose new costs must be understood for what it is. President Trump’s success has come from hard-nosed deals and a refusal to be played. Europeans seem to believe they can deflect this approach by offering words of friendship and then quietly imposing rules that undermine longstanding agreements and harm the U.S. tech sector.
Meloni’s memoir captures the spirit many admire — strong roots, fierce pride, and clear principles — but her government’s recent actions surrounding network fees show that principles alone are not enough. The mutually beneficial alliance Trump seeks with leaders like Meloni must rest on policies that truly defend fairness and reciprocity and reject regulatory overreach that unfairly burdens U.S. businesses.
In the end, Trump recognizes that true partnership is built on shared interests and respect, not on central planning that distorts the market and seeks to extract money under the guise of fairness. Meloni’s Italy may talk the language of sovereignty, but on this issue, it echoes the very European playbook Trump has fought against: using regulation to impose hidden taxes on American innovation.
If President Trump’s affection for Meloni is to be returned in kind, it must coincide with a call for policies aligned with his economic principles. Otherwise, public displays of friendship are mere symbolic gestures that hypocritically mask Europe’s continued attempts to challenge American leadership. Such contradictions weaken transatlantic unity and threaten the very foundation of the deal Trump fought to secure.
* * *
Ashley Baker is Executive Director of The Committee for Justice, a nonprofit organization that advocates for the rule of law and constitutionally limited government.
The views expressed in this piece are those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of The Daily Wire.

President Trump Meets With Visiting Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni At The White House

Trump’s Favorite European Ally Is Quietly Undermining His Trade Agenda

Business

Corporations

Foreign Policy

Giorgia Meloni

Italy

Opinion

Taxes

Technology

This week, more than 100 leading free speech experts <a href="https://adfinternational.org/campaign/open-letter-dsa">warned</a> that the Digital Services Act (DSA), a piece of European Union legislation, threatens to impose online censorship across the world. The letter was addressed to the European Commission, the architect of the censorial law.
The DSA gives the EU authority to enforce “content moderation” on platforms and search engines with over 45 million monthly users. It is one of the most dangerous censorship regimes of the digital age, enabling bureaucrats to control online speech at scale under the guise of online “safety” and “protecting democracy.”
This, however, is far from just a European issue. Restrictive speech rules made in Brussels are increasingly shaping the global internet, including on platforms used by Americans.
The letter follows the recently expressed concerns of the U.S. Ambassador to the EU, <a href="https://x.com/US2EU/status/1973100030249640355">Andrew Puzder</a>, that the DSA threatens to censor American citizens online. As the Ambassador stated, President Trump will not “tolerate a foreign government restricting the First Amendment fundamental free speech, free expression rights of American citizens.”
Ambassador Puzder’s statement came shortly after Google’s startling admission that Europe’s censorship laws target American companies and threaten American speech.
Signatories of this week’s letter to the European Commission, which was coordinated by ADF International, include a former U.S. Senator, a former VP of Yahoo Europe, cross-party members of the European Parliament, award-winning journalist and author Michael Shellenberger, former President of the American Civil Liberties Union Nadine Strossen, and academics, lawyers, and experts from around the globe.
The letter urges the Commission to consult with free speech experts and address their concerns as part of the Commission’s formal review of the DSA, which will occur by November 17.
But how could European legislation affect the First Amendment rights of Americans online?
The DSA and its codes of conduct require online platforms, such as X, YouTube, and Facebook, to address “hate speech” and “disinformation” online. These are vague and subjective terms that lack clear legal definitions and, in practice, are used to justify the censorship of disfavored views.
The definition of “illegal content,” which platforms must remove under the DSA, is any content that breaches EU or any EU member state law. This means the most restrictive anti-free speech laws in any individual EU country — of which there are unfortunately many across Europe — will now be applied across the bloc, introducing a lowest-common-denominator of censorship across the EU.
The shocking case of Finnish parliamentarian <a href="https://adfinternational.org/cases/paivi">Päivi Räsänen</a> gives an example of what this censorship could look like in practice. For nearly seven years, Päivi has been dragged through the courts in her country for alleged “hate speech”, for a Twitter post, in which she peacefully expressed her faith-based views and included a picture of Bible text.
With legal support from ADF International, on October 30, she faces her third trial at the Finnish Supreme Court, despite being unanimously acquitted in two previous trials. Under the DSA, draconian “hate speech” legislation, like that used to prosecute Päivi, could be applied across the EU.
<div id="attachment_981733" style="width: 874px" class="wp-caption aligncenter"><img loading="lazy" decoding="async" aria-describedby="caption-attachment-981733" class="size-large wp-image-981733" src="https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/10/GettyImages-470183360-864x576.jpg" alt="Chairwoman Päivi Räsänen of the Christian Democrats campaigns in Helsinki, Finland on April 18, 2015 ahead of the parliamentary elections to take place on Sunday, April 19, 2015. Finns go to the polls on Sunday in legislative elections widely expected to oust the country's left-right coalition amid growing discontent over a floundering economy undergoing a painful restructuring. AFP PHOTO / LEHTIKUVA / RONI REKOMAA *** FINLAND OUT *** (Photo credit should read" width="864" height="576" srcset="https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/10/GettyImages-470183360-864x576.jpg 864w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/10/GettyImages-470183360-300x200.jpg 300w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/10/GettyImages-470183360-768x512.jpg 768w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/10/GettyImages-470183360.jpg 1024w" sizes=" (max-width: 864px) 100vw, 864px" />Päivi Räsänen/ Credit: Roni Rekomaa,Roni Rekomaa/AFP via Getty Images.</div>
What has emerged from the DSA is a vast censorship infrastructure with coercive enforcement tools and an opaque network of EU-approved NGOs and “trusted flaggers,” which identify content for removal. If platforms fail to quickly remove flagged content, they face enormous fines — up to 6% of global revenue — and even EU-wide suspension. Individuals can also be suspended from platforms if they “persistently” post “illegal content.”
Although nominally restricted to the European Union, the DSA’s restrictive approach to online speech will be exported across the world, including to the United States. Keep in mind that GDPR exported EU data privacy standards worldwide, and the DSA could do just that for European speech controls. Platforms will be incentivized to adopt a single global content moderation policy, which could now be made to comply with the DSA’s restrictive approach.
French Member of the European Parliament Virginie Joron, a signatory of this week’s letter to the Commission, has added to these concerns of global censorship from the DSA, saying: “The French digital regulator ARCOM told me they believe the DSA allows them to censor any post anywhere in the world using the DSA. That means even an American citizen posting in Alabama could potentially have their online post taken down, even if the publication would be legal in the US”.
These threats put European legislation on a direct collision course with the First Amendment, in what is perhaps the greatest threat to American online free speech today.
Additionally, the House Judiciary Committee of the U.S. Congress has consistently warned that the DSA is coming for American speech. A July <a href="https://judiciary.house.gov/media/press-releases/foreign-censorship-threat-how-european-unions-digital-services-act-compels">report</a> detailed how the DSA is a censorship tool that requires the world’s largest social media platforms to engage in the censorship of core political discourse in Europe, the United States, and around the world.
If the DSA is left unchecked, Brussels could well become the world’s speech police. Let all concerned with the protection of free speech be on alert about the DSA. 
The European Commission must urgently engage with the free speech concerns outlined in this week’s letter and act now to ensure that the free speech rights of people across the world are respected on the internet.
* * *
Paul Coleman (@Paul_B_Coleman) is Executive Director of free speech legal advocacy organization ADF International.
The views expressed in this piece are those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of The Daily Wire.
<a href="https://get.dailywire.com/subscribe/plus/?utm_campaign=fall40&amp;utm_content=fallsale&amp;utm_medium=website&amp;utm_source=editorial">Get 40% off new DailyWire+ annual memberships with code FALL40 at checkout!</a>

EU sets Out Its International Digital Strategy

EU’s Digital Services Act Is The Biggest Threat To Free Speech Yet, Experts Warn

Apple

First Amendment

Google

Silicon Valley

Snapchat

Social Media Censorship

On the second anniversary of the Hamas October 7, 2023, massacre of more than 1,200 people in Israel, a Greek member of the European Parliament offered a rousing defense of Israel, declaring, “If Israel falls, the gates of hell will open for all of us.”
Afroditi Latinopoulou, founder and leader of the Voice of Reason party, made her comments before the European Union.
“Today marks the anniversary of Hamas’ horrific crime, in which they murdered, kidnapped and abused thousands of Israeli citizens. And who opened the borders and brought Islamists into our home? The leftists. Who is targeting Israel? The leftists,” she stated.
“Coincidence? I don’t think so,” she continued. “Today, the leftist propaganda is targeting Israel, which is fighting for its survival against Hamas’ terrorists. And media worldwide misinform and teach brainless people to hate Jews while Europeans are being murdered by fanatical Islamists. It is our sacred duty to help cleanse Gaza of Hamas. Israel is the only democratic Western state in the Middle East.”
<a class="c-link" href="https://get.dailywire.com/subscribe/plus/?utm_campaign=fall40&amp;utm_content=fallsale&amp;utm_medium=website&amp;utm_source=editorial" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" data-stringify-link="https://get.dailywire.com/subscribe/plus/?utm_campaign=fall40&amp;utm_content=fallsale&amp;utm_medium=website&amp;utm_source=editorial" data-sk="tooltip_parent">Get 40% off new DailyWire+ annual memberships with code FALL40 at checkout!</a>
“If Israel falls, the gates of hell will open for all of us,” she declared. “If they want peace, let Hamas release the hostages and accept Trump’s plan. Otherwise, let them disappear. There is no Palestinian state.”
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
October 7, 2023 Never forget 😢
It is our sacred duty to help cleanse Gaza of Hamas. If Israel falls, the gates of hell will open for all of us.
PALESTINIAN STATE DOES NOT EXIST.
🇬🇷🔥🇮🇱 <a href="https://t.co/TE27KpCC1w">pic.twitter.com/TE27KpCC1w</a>
&mdash; Latinopoulou (@latinopoulou) <a href="https://twitter.com/latinopoulou/status/1975910873907769822?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">October 8, 2025</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
She <a href="https://x.com/AdamMoczar/status/1948120228090769650">added</a>, “Illegal immigration is a well-orchestrated business for the orchestrators to make a fortune and to Islamize Europe. You have filled our countries with illegal migrants with the blessing of Germany and France. We pay Islam, which hates us, out of our savings, to turn our cities into ghettos, to rape and to murder before our eyes in the name of Allah.”
Last May, she <a href="https://www.hungarianconservative.com/articles/culture_society/afroditi-latinopoulou-we-need-more-orbans-fewer-macrons/">stated</a> at CPAC Hungary 2025 in Budapest, “Hungary is fortunate to have a visionary leader, Viktor Orbán, who is guiding the nation on the path of virtue and freedom. A leader who did not hesitate to confront the EU elite to protect his country. That is why today you see a Hungary that is clean, without ghettos, without [the] woke agenda. You see a Hungary being Hungarian. Hungary chose sovereignty, and did so with courage. It’s sent a powerful message: The definition of who we are is ours to give. And in Europe, we need more Orbáns and fewer Macrons.”

FRANCE-EU-POLITICS-PARLIAMENT

Greek Lawmaker Warns EU: ‘If Israel Falls, The Gates Of Hell Will Open For All Of Us’

Greek Lawmaker Warns EU: ‘If Israel Falls, The Gates Of Hell Will Open For All Of Us'

Afroditi Latinopoulou

Israel

Politics

A sweeping law implemented across Europe will severely curtail freedom of expression across the West, a group of over 100 free speech experts told the European Union on Thursday. 
Led by the Alliance Defending Freedom International, a diverse coalition of politicians, academics, and journalists <a href="https://adfinternational.org/campaign/open-letter-dsa">warned</a> European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen that the Digital Services Act (DSA) encourages and enables restrictions on political speech. The DSA empowers the European Commission to impose significant financial penalties on tech companies, which it says are not doing enough to combat so-called disinformation. It is set to be reviewed in November. 
“Freedom of expression is the cornerstone of democratic societies. It is through the exchange of ideas — including controversial ones — that societies evolve, and public officials remain accountable,” the coalition wrote in a <a href="https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/10/DSA-Free-Speech-Letter-to-EC_ADFI.pdf">letter</a> exclusively obtained by The Daily Wire. “Yet across the European Union and beyond, we are witnessing a shrinking of civic space. Each week brings new reports of individuals facing censorship or punitive measures for speech that challenges prevailing orthodoxy.”
The letter cited the case of Finnish Member of Parliament Päivi Räsänen, who has been <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/finnish-court-dismisses-hate-crime-charges-against-politician-on-trial-over-christian-beliefs">prosecuted</a> for sharing her Christian views of marriage and sexuality on social media. It also pointed to Adam Smith-Connor, a veteran who has been prosecuted for <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/british-army-vet-faces-charges-after-thoughtcrime-of-praying-near-u-k-abortion-clinic">silently praying</a> outside of an abortion facility. 
<div id="attachment_981733" style="width: 1034px" class="wp-caption alignnone"><img loading="lazy" decoding="async" aria-describedby="caption-attachment-981733" class="size-full wp-image-981733" src="https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/10/GettyImages-470183360.jpg" alt="Chairwoman Päivi Räsänen of the Christian Democrats campaigns in Helsinki, Finland on April 18, 2015 ahead of the parliamentary elections to take place on Sunday, April 19, 2015. Finns go to the polls on Sunday in legislative elections widely expected to oust the country's left-right coalition amid growing discontent over a floundering economy undergoing a painful restructuring. AFP PHOTO / LEHTIKUVA / RONI REKOMAA *** FINLAND OUT *** (Photo credit should read " width="1024" height="683" srcset="https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/10/GettyImages-470183360.jpg 1024w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/10/GettyImages-470183360-300x200.jpg 300w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/10/GettyImages-470183360-864x576.jpg 864w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/10/GettyImages-470183360-768x512.jpg 768w" sizes=" (max-width: 1024px) 100vw, 1024px" />Päivi Räsänen/ Credit: Roni Rekomaa,Roni Rekomaa/AFP via Getty Images.</div>
“The DSA introduces sweeping mechanisms that empower both institutions and private actors to flag content they believe to be ‘illegal’ — a term broadly defined as any content not compliant with EU or national laws,” the coalition wrote. 
The DSA relies on cooperation from non-governmental organizations that advise lawmakers whether someone’s online writings would be considered illegal. There would also be a high burden for reporting violations on tech companies. In certain circumstances, American tech companies may be fined up to 6% of their global revenue if they violate specific conditions. 
Signers of the letter included prominent thinkers like Hoover Institution research fellow Ayaan Hirsi Ali, former Kansas governor and ambassador for religious freedom Sam Brownback, Alliance Defending Freedom President Kristen Waggoner, Babylon Bee CEO Seth Dillon, journalist Michael Shellenberger, politicians from Brazil and Chile, and several members of the European Parliament. In total, 113 free speech advocates signed on. 
The signatories warned that the DSA not only helps governments crack down on child exploitation and terrorism incitement, but also allows one country to spread its strident restrictions on speech across the entire European Union. 
<a class="c-link c-link--focus-visible" href="https://get.dailywire.com/subscribe/plus/?utm_campaign=fall40&amp;utm_content=fallsale&amp;utm_medium=website&amp;utm_source=editorial" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" data-stringify-link="https://get.dailywire.com/subscribe/plus/?utm_campaign=fall40&amp;utm_content=fallsale&amp;utm_medium=website&amp;utm_source=editorial" data-sk="tooltip_parent" aria-describedby="sk-tooltip-19184">Get 40% off new DailyWire+ annual memberships with code FALL40 at checkout!</a> 
The law imposes “a pan-European censorship infrastructure with loosely defined boundaries and the potential to suppress legitimate democratic discourse,” the authors wrote. 
“The wide definition of illegal content allows the most speech-restrictive provisions of one single EU country to be imposed as a standard across the entire Union, and potentially worldwide, effectively importing the lowest common denominator of expression,” they added. 
They demanded that the European Union initiate a formal review of the DSA, examining its impact on free speech, disclosing the involvement of non-governmental organizations in reviewing speech and how they were selected, and ensuring that the law complies with the current European Union charter. 
In January, the House Judiciary Committee <a href="https://www.politico.eu/wp-content/uploads/2025/01/31/document-2025_1_42.pdf">sent</a> a letter to the European Commission stating that the DSA may conflict with the First Amendment of the United States Constitution. In a <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/congress-faces-pressure-as-europes-censorship-regime-threatens-american-free-speech">hearing</a> on censorship last month, the committee heard from free speech advocates warning about the potential dangers of the DSA.
“Why should this matter for Americans? Why should you be concerned? Because of the worldwide reach of European law,” <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/nigel-farage-spars-with-dems-as-he-warns-about-authoritarian-crackdown-on-free-speech">said</a> Alliance Defending Freedom International lawyer Lorcán Price. “The so-called Brussels effect changes regulation in every area that the European Union chooses to regulate, and now they’ve entered the business of regulating speech.”

Italian Tech Week 2025

EXCLUSIVE: Free Speech Advocates Challenge EU Over ‘Pan-European Censorship’ Regime

Congressman Jim Jordan on Tuesday celebrated Google&#8217;s decision to reinstate YouTube creators censored under President Joe Biden, calling the decision &#8220;a win for free expression.&#8221;
Jordan, who is the chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, told The Daily Wire that Google and YouTube parent company Alphabet <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/unacceptable-and-wrong-google-admits-caving-to-censorship-pressure-from-biden-admin" target="_blank" rel="noopener">admitted</a> in a Tuesday letter to the committee that the company and its subsidiaries bowed to pressure from the Biden administration to censor conservative creators speaking out about election integrity and COVID-19.
&#8220;They had kicked some people off the YouTube platform altogether — you, your channel, you&#8217;re gone. They&#8217;ve agreed to reinstate those individuals, which I think is good. They&#8217;ve said they will not use the fact-checkers, like other platforms have done — which was a big problem because fact-checkers are typically really biased against conservatives. I thought it was, again, a win for the First Amendment, a win for free expression.”
Alphabet <a href="https://www.foxnews.com/politics/google-reinstate-banned-youtube-accounts-censored-political-speech" target="_blank" rel="noopener">pledged</a> in the letter its &#8220;commitment to free expression,&#8221; and said it &#8220;will provide an opportunity for all creators to rejoin the platform if the company terminated their channels for repeated violations of COVID-19 and elections integrity policies that are no longer in effect.&#8221;
Creators banned under this regime include Dan Bongino and Sebastian Gorka, both of whom now serve in the Trump administration.
Jordan, who chairs the House Judiciary Committee, recalled just how extreme the Biden administration&#8217;s censorship efforts were.
&#8220;Never forget the Biden administration established the disinformation governance board,&#8221; Jordan said on Wednesday&#8217;s edition of Morning Wire. &#8220;I mean, the most Orwellian-sounding thing you could think of — as if a bunch of bureaucrats can tell you what you can say, what you can read, what you can tweet, what you can post! That was frightening stuff.&#8221;
Fortunately, Jordan notes, &#8220;we had an election last November and, thank goodness, things changed.&#8221;
Still, Jordan isn&#8217;t ready to give up the fight, warning that the United States could soon fall victim to European speech restrictions — something congressional Republicans are fighting to stop.
European speech laws are creating complications for the American social platforms, Jordan said. In particular, the European Union’s Digital Services Act and Digital Markets Act could <a href="https://fedsoc.org/events/the-digital-services-act-and-global-free-speech" target="_blank" rel="noopener">force</a> restrictive European speech codes on Americans.
Jordan takes that risk seriously.
Earlier this month, British authorities arrested Irish comedian Graham Linehan upon his landing at London’s Heathrow Airport after a flight from the United States. At issue were a series of X posts he wrote in April, which included jokes about transgender-identifying people.
“If a trans-identified male is in a female-only space, he is committing a violent, abusive act. Make a scene, call the cops and if all else fails, punch him in the balls,” one of Linehan’s posts in question <a href="https://x.com/judebrew/status/1965556461612007541" target="_blank" rel="noopener">read</a>.
Americans are generally not in danger of arrest in the United States for mocking leftist ideologies, such as transgenderism. But they are still under threat of suppression and retaliation from companies like YouTube or other influential entities, Jordan says.
“I think it&#8217;s just a matter of time before that happens to an American,” the lawmaker told The Daily Wire. “We&#8217;re particularly concerned about that relative to YouTube.”

Jim Jordan

Jim Jordan Celebrates YouTube Ending Conservative Censorship: ‘A Win For Free Expression’

Jim Jordan Celebrates YouTube Ending Conservative Censorship: 'A Win For Free Expression'

Congress

YouTube

Imagine facing your nation’s Supreme Court for the “crime” of sharing a Bible verse. On October 30, that’s the reality for Päivi Räsänen, a <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/top-finnish-court-to-hear-case-on-politician-charged-over-sharing-bible-verse?author=Leif+Le+Mahieu&amp;category=News&amp;elementPosition=undefined&amp;row=0&amp;rowType=Vertical+List&amp;title=Top+Finnish+Court+To+Hear+Case+On+Politician+Charged+Over+Sharing+Bible+Verse">Finnish grandmother</a>, medical doctor, and parliamentarian. Her soon-to-be seven-year ordeal began in 2019, when she questioned her church’s support for Helsinki Pride and posted a Bible verse on X. That single tweet triggered 13 hours of police interrogation, two full trials, and now a third prosecution under Finland’s “hate speech” law.
Räsänen’s case might sound like an exclusively European story — but it also serves as a warning about the growing threat of censorship coming from the EU. While someone living outside of Europe might assume they are exempt from the troubling wave of censorship spreading across the continent, that assumption is dangerously mistaken.
The EU has implemented an online censorship law that could turn stories like Päivi’s into a legalized norm. The law, known as <a href="https://adfinternational.org/es/article/digital-services-act-unpacked">The Digital Services Act</a> (DSA), poses one of the greatest threats to free speech online, not just in Europe, but worldwide.
Presented as a way to create a “safe online environment,” the DSA is in fact a sweeping censorship regime. It compels major online platforms such as Facebook, YouTube, X, and Google to take down “illegal content” or face crippling fines of up to 6% of their global revenue. For companies like Apple or Meta, that could mean billions. With penalties this steep, platforms have every incentive to preemptively over-censor content, not just in Europe, but everywhere.
And what counts as “illegal” content? That depends on the varying laws of 27 EU member states. One country’s vague definition of “hate speech” or “misinformation” can ripple outward, forcing platforms to delete content across the entire internet. What Brussels bureaucrats decide could silence speech in Boston or Boise — posts fully protected by the First Amendment, gone in an instant.
The enforcement system makes this worse. The DSA empowers “trusted flaggers,” which can include activist groups, regulators, or even private entities, to demand removals. The European Commission itself sits at the top, monitoring and punishing companies that don’t comply. In practice, this means platforms will act first and ask questions later, scrubbing lawful speech before it can cause “problems” in Europe.
<div id="attachment_652929" style="width: 1034px" class="wp-caption aligncenter"><img loading="lazy" decoding="async" aria-describedby="caption-attachment-652929" class="size-large wp-image-652929" src="https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2023/11/Screen-Shot-2023-11-14-at-7.01.23-AM-1024x573.png" alt="Päivi Räsänen" width="1024" height="573" srcset="https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2023/11/Screen-Shot-2023-11-14-at-7.01.23-AM-1024x573.png 1024w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2023/11/Screen-Shot-2023-11-14-at-7.01.23-AM-300x168.png 300w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2023/11/Screen-Shot-2023-11-14-at-7.01.23-AM-768x430.png 768w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2023/11/Screen-Shot-2023-11-14-at-7.01.23-AM-1536x859.png 1536w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2023/11/Screen-Shot-2023-11-14-at-7.01.23-AM.png 1573w" sizes=" (max-width: 1024px) 100vw, 1024px" />Credit: Alliance Defending Freedom International</div>
Päivi Räsänen’s case shows what happens when governments weaponize vague speech laws: peaceful expression treated as criminal conduct. The DSA threatens to make this dynamic global. By institutionalizing vague categories like “hate speech” and “disinformation,” it builds the <a href="https://constitutionaldiscourse.com/the-eu-digital-services-act-and-freedom-of-expression-friends-or-foes/">architecture for censorship</a> that knows no borders.
Americans should not be lulled into thinking this is someone else’s problem. The internet is global, and so are the platforms that host our speech. Already, U.S. lawmakers — from the House Judiciary Committee to Vice President JD Vance — have warned that the DSA could chill <a href="https://www.politico.eu/article/jim-jordan-presses-european-commission-for-answers-over-eu-social-media-law-henna-virkkunen-digital-services-act/">constitutionally protected expression</a> here at home. The danger isn’t hypothetical: EU officials have already floated the possibility of censoring American <a href="https://thehill.com/policy/technology/4824438-eu-sends-warning-letter-to-musk-ahead-of-trump-interview/">political figures under the law.</a>
The stakes are enormous. If the EU succeeds in exporting its censorship regime, authoritarian governments worldwide are likely to use it as a blueprint. They will point to Brussels as justification for their own crackdowns. Already, we’ve seen Europe attempt to export the DSA model abroad. For example, at the EU-Canada Summit, Canada and the EU agreed to advance a Digital Trade Agreement that <a href="https://judiciary.house.gov/sites/evo-subsites/republicans-judiciary.house.gov/files/evo-media-document/price-testimony.pdf">expands the reach of DSA principles.</a>
Free speech does not stop at national borders. If America cares about freedom of expression, it must push back against the DSA and its creeping global reach. Päivi Räsänen’s trial is a human face on what’s at stake. Her courage reminds us that when governments claim the power to police speech, no voice is safe.
* * *
Lorcan Price is an Irish barrister and legal counsel for ADF International.
The views expressed in this piece are those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of The Daily Wire.

Menu