2,422 videos 1,389,747,653 views US Joined Aug 30, 2018
Charlie Kirk is the Founder and President of Turning Point USA, the largest and fastest growing conservative youth activist organization in the country with over 250,000 student members, over 150 full-time staff, and a presence on over 2,000 high school and college campuses nationwide. Charlie is also the Chairman of Students for Trump, which aims to activate one million new college voters on campuses in battleground states in the lead up to the 2020 presidential election. His social media reaches over 100 million people per month and according to Axios, he is one of the "top 10 most engaged" Twitter handles in the world. He is also the host of “The Charlie Kirk Show,” which regularly ranks among the top news shows on Apple podcast charts.
Andrew Kolvet and Raheem Kassam on Mark Zuckerberg's Free Speech Pivot and Europe's Censorship Regime
Andrew Kolvet sits in for Charlie Kirk to discuss Mark Zuckerberg's announcement ending fact-checkers on Facebook and Instagram with Raheem Kassam of The National Pulse. Kassam, who has fought censorship battles on both sides of the Atlantic, brings skepticism born from years of exposing the political bias of Meta's fact-checking apparatus. The conversation expands to Europe's intensifying war on free speech, from European Parliament members targeting Elon Musk to the United Kingdom's alarming crackdown on social media posts. With the UK's Labour government threatening to sever national security agreements with America over free speech disputes, and cases like Tommy Robinson highlighting Britain's assault on dissent, this discussion reveals whether Zuckerberg's pivot signals genuine change or merely political opportunism. As America reclaims its role as the defender of free expression, the question emerges: will the transatlantic alliance fracture over fundamental freedoms?
Andrew Kolvet opens the show filling in for Charlie Kirk, who is traveling to Greenland with Donald Trump Jr. and Sergio Gor from Turning Point Action. Kolvet brings on Raheem Kassam, editor of The National Pulse and veteran of the Brexit campaign alongside Nigel Farage, to dissect Mark Zuckerberg's bombshell announcement that Meta will eliminate fact-checkers and adopt a Community Notes system similar to X (formerly Twitter).
In the video announcement, Zuckerberg declares that Facebook and Instagram will get rid of fact-checkers, simplify content policies on immigration and gender, and reduce automated content filtering. He acknowledges that fact-checkers "have just been too politically biased and have destroyed more trust than they've created" and promises to work with President Trump to push back against foreign governments pressuring American companies to censor more.
Kassam's response is blunt: "I cannot say that I trust Mark Zuckerberg." Drawing on Ronald Reagan's famous phrase, he modifies it to "trust but verify" before admitting he's "more the type that is just never trusting." However, Kassam reveals that since 2020, The National Pulse has been systematically deconstructing Meta's fact-checking regime, identifying individual fact-checkers and exposing their political affiliations.
The National Pulse's Investigation Into Meta's Fact-Checkers
Kassam details The National Pulse's quiet but effective investigative work targeting Meta's fact-checking partners. "We don't spend a lot of money on marketing and PR," he explains, "but we do that quiet diligent hard work behind the scenes." This work led to significant results: one fact-checking organization called Lead Stories had to remove staff members after The National Pulse exposed them as Democrat donors and outright Democrat activists.
Even more damning, Kassam reveals that Lead Stories had signed agreements to work with TikTok, the Chinese Communist Party-controlled app. This investigation chipped away at the credibility of Meta's entire fact-checking apparatus, forcing transparency into a system that had operated with opacity for years.
Despite his skepticism about Zuckerberg's motives, Kassam acknowledges this represents progress: "I do think we are starting to make the right inroads and this is a development that shows you that the fact-checking regimen at Meta has been so opaque it has lacked transparency." He welcomes the shift to a community-based system like X's Community Notes but cautions: "Let's see how it actually is implemented because the devil once again will be in the detail."
The Concern About Political Winds Shifting
Kolvet expresses concern about the ease with which Zuckerberg might reverse course if political winds shift again. "It just feels a little bit too easy for him to sort of move that Titanic," Kolvet observes. "What happens if the political wind shift again? Is he just going to move it back in a direction that's anti-American?"
This skepticism is well-founded given Meta's history of policy changes that appeared responsive to political pressure from the left. The question remains whether this represents a genuine commitment to free speech or merely a tactical adjustment to the new political reality of a Trump administration.
Zuckerberg's stated intention to work with President Trump represents a significant shift. He acknowledges that America's robust free speech laws made the last few years "incredibly difficult" for Meta because the company didn't have backing from the American government. Instead, government officials were coercing Facebook and Meta to become more censorious.
Europe's War on Free Speech Intensifies
The conversation shifts to Europe, where the censorship regime is intensifying rather than retreating. Kolvet notes breaking news that European Members of Parliament are calling for stricter rules against Elon Musk because he's exerting force for free speech.
Kassam, who has worked in Brussels and Strasbourg and knows the European political apparatus intimately, predicts the European Commission and parliament are having "a fullon meltdown over the fact that ordinary people might get to say what they think once again." These bureaucrats have worked for years to tamp down free speech across Europe, and Zuckerberg's announcement represents a direct threat to their control.
The irony is not lost on Kassam, who reveals that just last week he received three strikes on his Facebook page threatening account deletion because fact-checkers disagreed with his framing of stories. He looks forward to the end of that regime while predicting that "the Brussels apparatus, the Davos apparatus certainly won't."
The Tommy Robinson Case and UK Censorship
Kolvet raises the case of Tommy Robinson, a controversial but prominent British figure who appears to be suffering punishment for being "a loud and proud Britain." While acknowledging Robinson is a complicated figure who can be his own worst enemy, Kolvet notes that from an outsider's perspective, Robinson has been restricted as part of the European stricture against free speech in the EU.
Kassam, who knows Robinson personally, provides sobering context: "If I were in the UK today, I suspect I would already be behind bars for some of the things that I share on social media. This is not a joke. I am not putting my tongue in my cheek when I say that. I'm not exaggerating. I truly believe that to be the case."
People back home in the UK agree with Kassam's assessment, telling him he is "one of the most spicy people online" and there's "absolutely no way the authorities would let you get away with that stuff here." This applies even more strongly to someone like Tommy Robinson.
Kassam points to terrifying videos of police coming to people's homes in the UK because they posted something on Facebook about migrants or other sensitive topics. The free speech culture in Britain has deteriorated to the point where citizens face criminal prosecution for social media posts.
The UK Labour Government's Resistance
The United Kingdom's newly elected Labour government represents the left wing of the Democrats in British politics, and Kassam predicts they will resist what Zuckerberg, Trump, and Musk are doing to restore free speech. The situation has escalated to an alarming degree: the UK government suggested they may sever national security agreements with the United States if Donald Trump agrees with Elon Musk on free speech issues.
"That is no small beer," Kassam emphasizes. "That is a fundamental reorientation of the geopolitical order." If Labour chooses to tie itself more closely with Brussels and perhaps even Beijing rather than maintain the special relationship with America, it would represent irreversible friction in the transatlantic alliance.
The choice facing Britain is stark: align with the censorship regime of the European Union and potentially authoritarian models from China, or maintain historical ties with America at the cost of abandoning the speech restrictions the Labour government prefers.
America's Role as Free Speech Champion
Kolvet argues that America should be exerting its economic and military leverage - not kinetic warfare, but the leverage that comes from troops stationed across the world and defending Europe through NATO. Rather than exporting the LGBTQ flag at embassies and ensuring the censorship regime remains intact with transatlantic partners, America should defend free speech and support nations that protect the free expression of their citizens.
This represents a fundamental reorientation of American foreign policy priorities. Instead of pressuring allies to adopt progressive social policies and content moderation standards, America would use its influence to defend the First Amendment principle of free speech globally.
The question becomes whether this will develop into what Kolvet calls "World War III from a free speech perspective" - a transatlantic conflict not over trade or security in traditional terms, but over the fundamental right to speak freely without government interference.
The Path Forward
The discussion reveals several key dynamics at play. First, Zuckerberg's announcement may represent genuine progress, but it requires verification and sustained pressure to ensure implementation matches rhetoric. The National Pulse's investigative work demonstrates that exposing the political bias and connections of fact-checkers can produce real results.
Second, Europe's censorship regime is intensifying even as America moves in the opposite direction. The European Commission, European Parliament, and governments like the UK's Labour administration are doubling down on speech restrictions, creating a fundamental values conflict with the United States.
Third, America has leverage it can deploy to defend free speech internationally. Economic power, military presence, and diplomatic relationships provide tools to pressure allies to respect free expression rather than criminalize dissent.
The stakes extend beyond individual cases like Tommy Robinson or fact-checks on Facebook posts. This represents a civilizational question about whether Western nations will preserve the right to free speech that has been foundational to their prosperity and liberty, or whether they will adopt increasingly authoritarian models of controlling information and punishing dissent.
