(Natural News)—It’s been a year since Big Tech mogul and former X CEO Elon Musk released the controversial “Twitter Files,” which proved that President Joe Biden’s Department of Justice (DOJ) and White House colluded with previous Twitter management to implement big-brother censorship and high-profile content moderation on mostly conservatives because of their political views. Then, the Facebook Files emerged, leading Meta to change internal policies due to pressure from the Biden administration.
Now, internal documents from Google, which owns YouTube, have been unearthed. These show that Biden pressured the company to censor Americans from spreading alleged “misinformation” related to the Wuhan coronavirus (COVID-19) and vaccinations. This was disclosed by House Judiciary Chairman Rep. Jim Jordan (R-OH), who held a live hearing on social media censorship on Thursday.
On a long thread on X, where he first presented other tech giants’ collusion with big government, Jordan further said: “Here’s the first edition of the YouTube Files. We knew the Biden White House was pushing Facebook and Twitter to censor more. Now we know the White House was repeatedly pressuring Google to censor content on YouTube.”
THE YOUTUBE FILES PART 1. BIDEN WHITE HOUSE PRESSURED YOUTUBE TO CENSOR AMERICANS.
Internal docs from Google (YouTube’s parent company) obtained by @JudiciaryGOP and @Weaponization show that the Biden White House wanted Americans censored.
? Thread:https://t.co/tM1IdEIJCG
— Rep. Jim Jordan (@Jim_Jordan) November 30, 2023
The documents, acquired through a source close to the committee, reveal that the White House sought to quash vaccine skeptics. The lawmaker further disclosed that on April 12, 2021, Rob Flaherty, Biden’s director of Digital Strategy, emailed Google wanting to know how the company could better crack down on vaccine “misinformation” and to discuss ways the White House can partner in its product work. Flaherty already left the administration to be deputy campaign manager for Biden’s re-election bid in the 2024 polls.
After a week, an internal email from Google noted that Flaherty “particularly dug in on our decision-making for borderline content,” referring to content that doesn’t violate their Community Guidelines, but instead brushes up against it. Another week passed, the search engine company acknowledged that they sent the White House a list of videos removed for COVID-19 vaccine “misinformation.” “Really [Flaherty’s] interested in what we’re seeing that is not coming down,” reads an email from YouTube. “…there is a very high degree of interest now coming from the White House regarding vaccine misinfo/vaccine hesitancy and our work around borderline content.” It continued, saying that unfortunately, the role of tech in addressing vaccine hesitancy is about to come under a massive spotlight particularly as the supply of the vaccine is soon to outpace demand.
“Over the last several weeks, the Google & YT GAAP team have had conversations with the White House staff on YouTube’s policies and all the great work that is being done to raise authoritative information and fight harmful misinformation related to COVID-19 misinformation,” the communication further read.
The next day, YouTube’s Government Affairs team sent an internal email to the product team to flag the interactions with the White House. “We were hoping to get something on the books in the next two weeks or so to prevent anything from potentially spiraling out of control,” read the email. The team then asked if the product team would meet directly with White House staff to show how much censorship they’ve conducted on their behalf, because “[White House] staff continued to have questions on the raise/reduce efforts” to reduce ‘misinformation’.
Within the same thread, Jordan vowed that his committee will continue the critical investigative work to further inform legislative solutions to the vast government censorship enterprise. He also said that Sen, Rand Paul and the House Republicans introduced legislation that would provide victims of censorship with the ability to sue the government bureaucrats, who are responsible for causing their constitutionally protected speech to be removed. (Related: Rep. Jim Jordan destroys Democrat claim that government never told Twitter to censor.)
Jordan issues subpoena to Flaherty to testify
Jordan immediately subpoenaed Flaherty to testify about his actions to pressure digital platforms to censor content on the same day of the committee hearing. The latter must sit for committee questions on Jan. 11, the Ohio solon wrote in the legally binding demand for testimony.
“The committee was able to obtain documents that demonstrate the central role you played in communicating the Biden White House’s censorship efforts to social media companies, including the White House’s demands to censor true information, memes, satire and other constitutionally protected forms of expression,” Jordan said in the letter to Flaherty. “Your testimony will inform the committee’s legislative reforms aimed at preventing the Executive Branch from wielding its immense power to pressure social media platforms to censor disfavored viewpoints.”
According to the New York Post, the pending Supreme Court case, for which oral arguments have not yet been scheduled, followed a lower court ruling restricting the government’s ability to pressure companies to squelch disfavored speech. The said ruling came in response to a lawsuit brought by the Republican state attorneys general of Missouri and Louisiana, who argued that the Biden administration was violating Americans’ First Amendment free speech rights.
The lawsuit turned up a large number of documents showing that Flaherty and his team contacted Facebook and Twitter to limit the spread of alleged “misinformation” about the safety and efficacy of COVID-19 shots. But he repeatedly declined to appear to testify in the case. The same goes with former White House Press Secretary Jen Psaki, who proclaimed in July 2021 that Biden aides were “flagging” content for removal, but were unsuccessful.
Below is the video of the House Judiciary subcommittee meeting to examine claims that the federal government censors speech on social media.
Censorship.news has more stories related to this.
Sources for this article include:
Safeguarding Your American Dream: Discover the Power of America First Healthcare
In today’s economy, healthcare costs remain one of the biggest threats to financial stability and family security. Americans work hard to build a better life, yet rising medical expenses can quickly erode savings, force tough trade-offs, and even push families toward debt or bankruptcy. Medical bills continue to rank as the leading cause of personal bankruptcy in the United States, with millions facing underinsurance or unexpected out-of-pocket burdens that no one plans for. Many turn to government-run marketplace plans under the Affordable Care Act, hoping for relief, only to discover that what appears affordable on paper often delivers higher long-term costs, limited real protection, and coverage that may not align with personal values or family needs.
America First Healthcare stands out as a private insurance agency dedicated to helping conservatives and families secure better coverage and better rates through customized, values-aligned options. By conducting free insurance reviews, the agency uncovers hidden gaps in existing policies and connects clients with private alternatives that emphasize personal responsibility, small-government principles, and genuine affordability—often delivering up to 20% savings while providing stronger protection for the American Dream.
The allure of marketplace plans is easy to understand: open enrollment periods, premium tax credits for many households, and the promise of “comprehensive” benefits mandated by law. Yet recent data reveals a different reality, especially after the expiration of enhanced premium subsidies at the end of 2025. Enrollment for 2026 dropped by more than one million people compared to the prior year, with many shifting to lower-tier bronze plans to keep monthly premiums manageable.
These plans feature significantly higher deductibles—averaging around $7,500 nationally—and greater cost-sharing requirements. Families who once paid modest amounts after subsidies now face average premium increases of $65 or more per month, even as they accept plans that leave them responsible for thousands in upfront costs before meaningful coverage kicks in.
High deductibles create a dangerous barrier to care. Studies show that people in such plans are less likely to seek timely treatment for chronic conditions, attend preventive screenings, or fill necessary prescriptions. A seemingly minor illness or injury can balloon into major expenses when patients delay care until problems worsen. For a family of four, a single hospitalization, cancer diagnosis, or unexpected surgery can easily exceed the deductible, triggering coinsurance and out-of-pocket maximums that still leave substantial bills. One recent analysis noted that some proposed changes could push family deductibles toward $31,000 in future years, further exposing households to financial risk.
Beyond the numbers, marketplace plans often carry structural limitations. Coverage for certain critical services may include waiting periods or narrower networks that restrict access to preferred doctors and specialists. Preventive care is required to be covered without cost-sharing, but everything else—lab work, imaging, specialist visits, or ongoing treatment—typically waits until the deductible is met. This reactive model contrasts sharply with the proactive, holistic approach many families prefer, especially those focused on wellness, early intervention, and maintaining health to enjoy life rather than merely reacting to illness.
Values alignment represents another growing concern. Government-influenced plans operate within a framework shaped by federal mandates and political priorities that may not reflect conservative principles of limited government, personal freedom, and ethical stewardship. Families who want to direct their healthcare dollars toward providers and benefits that honor traditional values sometimes find marketplace options feel misaligned, forcing a compromise between affordability and conviction.
Private alternatives, by contrast, offer year-round flexibility without the restrictions of open enrollment windows. Independent agents can shop across a wider range of carriers to design plans tailored to specific family needs—whether that means lower deductibles for frequent medical users, broader provider networks, or add-ons that support wellness and preventive services from day one. Clients frequently report more stable premiums that do not automatically escalate each year, along with genuine cost savings once the full picture of deductibles, copays, and coverage depth is considered.
Take the experience of real families who made the switch. Amanda C. shared that her new plan felt “way better” than what she had through the marketplace. Johnny Y. noted his previous coverage kept increasing annually until he found a more stable private option. Sofia S. expressed delight with her plan and began recommending it to others. These stories echo a common theme: when families move beyond one-size-fits-all government marketplaces, they often discover customized protection that better safeguards both health and finances.
Founder Jordan Sarmiento’s own journey underscores the stakes. In 2021, a six-day hospitalization generated a $95,000 bill. Under a well-structured private “Conservative Care Coverage” plan, his out-of-pocket responsibility would have been just $500. That stark difference illustrates how thoughtful planning and private options can prevent a medical event from becoming a financial catastrophe.
Practical steps exist for anyone questioning their current coverage. Start with a no-obligation review of your existing policy to identify gaps—high deductibles, limited critical-care benefits, or escalating premiums. Compare total projected costs (premiums plus potential out-of-pocket expenses) rather than monthly premiums alone. Consider family health history, anticipated needs, and lifestyle priorities. Private agencies can present side-by-side options that include stronger wellness incentives, broader access, and plans built on shared values of self-reliance and freedom.
In an era when healthcare inflation continues to outpace general cost-of-living increases, relying solely on marketplace solutions carries growing risk. Families who proactively explore private alternatives frequently achieve meaningful savings while gaining peace of mind that their coverage truly works when needed most.
America First Healthcare makes this exploration straightforward through its free review process. Families and individuals receive personalized guidance to close coverage holes, reduce unnecessary expenses, and secure plans that align with conservative principles—protecting wallets, health, and the American Dream without government overreach. Many who complete a review discover they can enjoy better benefits for less, often saving up to 20% while gaining the customization and stability that marketplace plans struggle to deliver.
Ultimately, protecting your family’s future requires looking beyond the marketing of “affordable” government options. By understanding the long-term costs hidden in high deductibles, shifting coverage tiers, and values mismatches, Americans can make empowered choices. Private, values-driven insurance offers a smarter path—one that rewards diligence, supports wellness, and delivers real security. For those ready to move beyond the limitations of traditional marketplace plans, a simple review can reveal options designed to serve families, not bureaucracies. The American Dream thrives when individuals and families retain control over their healthcare decisions, and thoughtful private coverage plays a vital role in making that possible.