The US Congress has proven that the election in Romania was rigged with the complicity of the European Commission, sovereignist propaganda writes.
NEWS: The Judiciary Committee of the United States Congress issued a report discussing censorship on social media, mentioning anti-democratic tools used in the European Union, including the annulment of elections. We thank the American congressmen for adding another piece to our argument regarding the unconstitutional and undemocratic annulment of the election. [...] They abused their power, they had Antony Blinken, they had Macron's France on their side, and the results must be made public.
NARRATIVE: The US Congress has proven that Romania's presidential election was rigged with the complicity of the European Commission.
PURPOSE: To promote sovereigntist rhetoric, to stir and amplify social unrest, to validate previously promoted conspiracy theories.
The report in question is not an official US Congress document
WHY THE NARRATIVE IS FALSE: In recent days, a document presented as an “investigation” by the US Congress regarding the alleged censorship exerted by the European Commission on digital platforms ahead of national elections, including in Romania, has been widely circulated in local media. A careful analysis, however, shows that this document is neither an investigation in the proper sense, nor does it express the official position of the United States of America. Rather, it should be read as a political statement intended to strike at the European Union, for the direct benefit of technology companies with American shareholders.
The first aspect that needs to be clarified is essential: the report does not represent the official position of the USA. From the very first page of the document cited by sovereignists, we notice that it is not an official act of the House Judiciary Committee (not of the entire Congress, as George Simion erroneously claims). It was drafted by committee members' staff and, moreover, it is merely provisional, a draft of a potential report that would, at any rate, need to be submitted for an approval vote by congressmen to become official. It therefore originates from partisan political circles, in this case Republican/MAGA circles, without an official effect. In international law, such texts hold the value of political opinion, not of a state position. Presenting them as “the US reaction” is simply a misrepresentation. Furthermore, the document in question reflects only the opinion of the Republican Party. In July 2025, Democratic congressmen published a document on the US Congress website dismantling the false narratives from the first draft of the “misleading Republican report on the EU's Digital Services Act (DSA)”.
A second red flag is the language. The text frequently resorts to terms like “establishment”, “aggressive censorship”, “silencing the opposition”, or “profoundly anti-democratic actions”. These phrases are typical of militant political discourse, not of an investigative report. A serious investigation would have needed to include fully published documents, explicit methodology, a clear separation between facts, hypotheses and opinions, and even a substantial right of reply from all stakeholders. For instance, when talking about “trusted flaggers”, the report falsely accuses the European Commission of deciding who this technical status is applied to. In fact, these flaggers are established by national authorities, meaning Brussels hold no responsibility for their designation.
Returning to Romania, although the annulment of the election and the lack of transparency from national authorities raise legitimate questions, this was used in the document more as an emotional trigger designed to build a general accusation against the European Union. The report does, indeed, cast doubt on the narrative about Russia’s involvement in the Romanian electoral process, but it does not draw conclusions in this regard. It merely mentions “media reports” and statements from TikTok representatives. Paradoxically, even AUR's vice-president, Dan Dungaciu, contrary to the huge wave of disinformation that swept Romania, said that the controversial report is actually one of “friendship between American and Romanian sovereignists”, with no official value. The claims regarding the lack of Russian interference in election processes are based, as President Nicușor Dan also pointed out, on the position of a single private company, TikTok, and as such cannot represent or replace a legal assessment. It is worth noting, however, that TikTok has also admitted in several public reports that it proactively identified multiple covert influence networks, prevented and removed tens of thousands of fake accounts and interactions, and banned hundreds of accounts impersonating presidential candidates.
In fact, portraying the EU as a “censorial” and “anti-democratic” actor has a clear purpose: to delegitimize European regulation, specifically the Digital Services Act, and to create political pressure to weaken it. The report does not primarily defend freedom of expression, but the commercial interests of platforms contesting the loss of their absolute autonomy. The DSA and other European regulations directly affect the business model of major platforms, as well as their ability to monetize controversial but high-audience content. It also significantly restricts their freedom to unilaterally set the rules of the digital space. Since most of these platforms are American companies, listed on the US stock exchanges, with American shareholders and benefiting from strong lobbying in Washington, it was normal for such an initiative to originate in America.
In conclusion, the document is, rather, a disguised political statement, inserted into a broader conflict between the European Union and major American digital platforms, in which Romania is used only as a pawn. The report does not seek to improve global democracy, but to undermine the legitimacy of the EU as a regulator, in favor of extremely powerful economic actors. Treating it as an objective arbiter of truth does not mean defending freedom of expression, but participating, knowingly or not, in an influence campaign where the real stake is not democracy, but control over the digital space and the profits generated by it.
The report activated the entire pro-Russian network in Romania
BACKGROUND: In recent days, more and more voices from the “sovereigntist” area in the online environment, publicly encouraged by George Simion, the president of AUR, have started demanding the organization of early parliamentary and presidential elections, citing the “conclusions” of the report analyzed in this material. The message was initially picked up by publications known for promoting narratives favorable to Russia and subsequently amplified on social media by conspiracy influencers and supporters of Călin Georgescu. The report was presented by sites such as InPolitics, OrtodoxInfo, and ActiveNews (sanctioned on numerous occasions for disseminating false information and known for constantly promoting messages associated with extremist and pro-Russian currents) as proof that the “elected president” Călin Georgescu was fraudulently removed from the electoral race or that Nicușor Dan was “appointed” president of Romania by the European Commission. Subsequently, various influencers (BobbyD, Makaveli, etc.), journalists (Anca Alexandrescu, Ion Cristoiu, Robert Turcescu, etc.), or individuals with political connections (Gelu Vișan, Aurelian Pavelescu, Gheorghe Piperea, etc.), known for promoting false narratives and pro-Kremlin messages, picked up and enriched the narrative with their own views. As an example, the president of the former PNȚCD, Pavelescu, said that the report proves how the European Union attacked the United States.
Check sources:
---copie-image.webp)
