This is what Fascism actually looks like
Alphabet Inc., the parent company of Google and YouTube, submitted a letter on September 23, 2025, to the U.S. House Judiciary Committee in response to a subpoena. The letter, authored by attorney Daniel F. Donovan of King & Spalding, details communications between the company and the Biden administration regarding content moderation on YouTube.
The letter states that senior Biden administration officials, including White House staff, conducted “repeated and sustained outreach” to Alphabet about user-generated content related to the COVID-19 pandemic that did not violate YouTube’s policies. The letter describes this outreach as creating a “political atmosphere that sought to influence the actions of platforms based on their concerns regarding misinformation.“
The letter also addresses content related to the 2020 election, noting that YouTube had terminated over 8,000 channels by December 2020 for election-related violations. Thus, the terminations may be seen as a direct attempt to interfere with the election. It further indicates that the company’s policies during this period relied on input from Biden administration health authorities and those policies were maintained through 2024, until the Trump administration returned to office. Alphabet states in the letter that such government attempts to dictate content moderation are “unacceptable and wrong“, but they stop short of admitting to their own culpability.
Actions Taken by YouTube
According to the letter, YouTube removed videos and banned accounts for content on topics including vaccine efficacy, mask mandates, the lab-leak hypothesis, and election fraud claims. Among thousands affected were prominent individuals such as Dan Bongino, Sebastian Gorka, and Steve Bannon, whose accounts were permanently banned for COVID-19 or election-related content. The letter estimates that thousands of accounts were impacted overall. Others say that the number is more likely “tens of thousands”.
Policy Changes Announced
Alphabet announced in the letter that YouTube will offer reinstatement opportunities to all creators previously banned for “political speech violations” related to COVID-19 and the 2020 election. The platform will no longer use third-party fact-checkers to take actions or apply labels to content. The company also expressed concerns about the European Union’s Digital Services Act and Digital Markets Act, stating it will remain vigilant regarding obligations that could affect content moderation.
There was no mention of any sort of compensation or reparations for those affected.
This disclosure follows similar admissions from Meta in 2024, where the company ended its third-party fact-checking program after revealing pressure from the Biden administration. The House Judiciary Committee, chaired by Rep. Jim Jordan (R-OH), described Alphabet’s response as a step in its ongoing investigation into content moderation practices.
Alphabet’s letter aligns with earlier document releases from X (formerly Twitter), known as the “Twitter Files,” which detailed interactions between the platform and the Biden administration on content moderation. Initiated in December 2022 by then-new owner Elon Musk, the Twitter Files consisted of internal documents shared with journalists, revealing government pressure on Twitter to moderate content related to COVID-19, the 2020 election, and other topics.
Key installments include:
- December 2022 (Part 10, by David Zweig): Documents showed that both the Trump and Biden administrations pressured Twitter to moderate COVID-19 content, including elevating certain information and suppressing others, such as vaccine skepticism. The Biden White House requested meetings shortly after inauguration, focused on “COVID misinformation,” targeting high-profile accounts.
- Other Installments (2022): Files revealed Twitter’s handling of the Hunter Biden laptop story, including requests from the 2020 Biden campaign to flag or remove tweets. They also documented FBI and White House communications urging moderation of election-related content, with Twitter granting requests from both the Trump White House and Biden campaign to remove posts in 2020.
These releases contributed to broader investigations, including the House Judiciary Committee’s 2024 interim report “The Censorship-Industrial Complex,” which cited Twitter Files evidence alongside emails from the Biden White House to platforms like Twitter, showing coordinated efforts to censor content on COVID-19 and elections.
Connection to Prior Legal Proceedings
The letter aligns with findings from the 2022 lawsuit Missouri v. Biden (later Murthy v. Missouri), filed by the attorneys general of Missouri and Louisiana. The suit alleged that Biden administration officials coerced social media platforms, including YouTube and Twitter, to suppress content on COVID-19, elections, and other topics. In July 2023, U.S. District Judge Terry Doughty issued a preliminary injunction blocking certain government communications with platforms, describing the actions as an “Orwellian ‘Ministry of Truth.‘”
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit partially upheld the injunction in September 2023, ruling that officials from the White House, Surgeon General’s office, CDC, and FBI likely violated the First Amendment through coercion or significant encouragement of content moderation.
The Supreme Court vacated the injunction in June 2024 in a 6-3 decision, ruling that the plaintiffs lacked standing to sue. The majority opinion, written by Justice Amy Coney Barrett, held that the plaintiffs failed to show a direct causal link between government actions and their content moderation experiences. Justice Samuel Alito dissented, arguing that the case demonstrated a “successful campaign of coercion” that posed risks to free speech.
Potential Legal Recourse for Affected Individuals
Individuals and entities whose content was removed or accounts banned, such as Bongino, Gorka, Bannon, and thousands of others, may have grounds to pursue legal action against individuals in the Biden administration and Alphabet for alleged violations of First Amendment rights. Potential lawsuits could seek damages for lost revenue, reputational harm, and suppression of protected speech, alleging that government pressure led to unconstitutional collusion (fascism) with private platforms. Similar claims have been filed in cases like Justin Hart’s 2023 lawsuit against Twitter, Facebook, and Biden officials, citing Twitter Files evidence of collusion.
The full text of Alphabet’s letter is available on the House Judiciary Committee’s website. For further developments, visit PipkinsReports.com.