The Biden regime's "misinformation" campaign, ostensibly aimed at foreign election interference (no, the bad kind, not the "good" kind practiced by Saint Barack of Honolulu) was arguably the greatest threat to free speech since the Woodrow Wilson administration, over a century ago, with immense potential to skew the nation's narrative. From this 2022 FIRE report:

In 2020, Facebook suppressed the coverage of the Hunter Biden laptop story. On Joe Rogan’s podcast, Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg revealed the suppression was due to a vague warning from the FBI about possible “Russian propaganda.” Fifty former intelligence officials also wrote a letter, amplified by the media, stating that the Hunter Biden laptop story was a “Russian information operation” to manipulate the outcome of the 2020 election. Now we know the truth: Emails purportedly from the laptop were authenticated by both The New York Times and The Washington Post.

The fallout of falsely discrediting the truth cannot be overstated: When government interferes in the marketplace of ideas and determines something true is misinformation, disinformation, or malinformation, it treats its citizens like children and gives the impression that certain government officials favor one political party or electoral outcome over another. The result: intensifying tribalism. And what’s stopping government actors from weaponizing that fuzzy concept of malinformation to continue to vilify people and journalists? 

The potential for abuse is staggering. 

Like so much Democratic policy, the campaign against "misinformation" is spread across innumerable unelected, largely unaccountable non-profits, as well as executive-branch offices - a handy way of laundering influence as well as money. 

But according to Gabe Kaminsky and Madeliene Rowley at The Freepress, the administration is taking their first hacks at the monster that Obama and BIden built, and that Harris and Walz promised to supercharge.  

It's an extension of efforts that started during the twilight of the Biden regime:

The Biden years saw heightened public scrutiny of some of these programs, which Republican lawmakers and free speech groups criticized as “censorship” devices in the U.S. That culminated in an executive order from President Donald Trump on his first day in office that accused the government of violating the free-speech rights of Americans “under the guise of combating ‘misinformation,’ ‘disinformation,’ and ‘malinformation.’ ”

But until now, it has not been clear just how much taxpayer money was spent on these programs and how many federal agencies were involved in the effort. Indeed, it was only when The Free Press began contacting agencies for comment about programs listed in federal documents as active that officials in the Trump administration began to scrutinize them more closely—launching investigations and evaluating internal policies.

Since then, federal officials have terminated at least several dozen programs related to misinformation and disinformation, according to documents and interviews.

The FreePress report references many, any such efforts - many collected in a 2023 House Judiciary Committee staff report on "Weaponization Of 'Disinformation" Pseudo-Experts and Bureaucrats'", which noted:

The First Amendment to the Constitution rightly limits the government’s role in monitoring and censoring Americans’ speech, but these disinformation researchers (often funded, at least in part, by taxpayer dollars) were not strictly bound by these constitutional guardrails. What the federal government could not do directly, it effectively outsourced to the newly emerging censorship-industrial complex. 

Enter the Election Integrity Partnership (EIP), a consortium of “disinformation” academics led by Stanford University’s Stanford Internet Observatory (SIO) that worked directly with the Department of Homeland Security and the Global Engagement Center, a multi-agency entity housed within the State Department, to monitor and censor Americans’ online speech in advance of the 2020 presidential election. Created in the summer of 2020 “at the request” of the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA),3 the EIP provided a way for the federal government to launder its censorship activities in hopes of bypassing both the First Amendment and public scrutiny...

...As this new information reveals, and this report outlines, the federal government and universities pressured social media companies to censor true information, jokes, and political opinions. This pressure was largely directed in a way that benefitted one side of the political aisle: true information posted by Republicans and conservatives was labeled as “misinformation” while false information posted by Democrats and liberals was largely unreported and untouched by the censors. The pseudoscience of disinformation is now—and has always been—nothing more than a political ruse most frequently targeted at communities and individuals holding views contrary to the prevailing narratives.

And Kaminsky and Rowley, noting that the Administration is "just getting started", at least make it clear that the administration has actually started:

Over the last decade, Americans have been slandered, fired, charged, and even jailed for simply voicing their opinions.

That ends today.

I am announcing the closure of the @StateDept's Counter Foreign Information Manipulation and Interference, formerly the Global Engagement… https://t.co/ucdBPmPJC1

— Secretary Marco Rubio (@SecRubio) April 16, 2025

And as with any time you start hacking away at undergrowth, you discover some hidden surprises:

In Congress, powerful Republican lawmakers are now working with the Trump administration to identify further spending cuts. Jim Jordan, the Ohio Republican who chairs the House Judiciary Committee, told The Free Press some of the awards that are still active “may spark us to do additional things in some of the areas we haven’t quite dug into yet.”

In February, Jordan’s committee said the National Science Foundation funded “artificial intelligence–powered” censorship tools used by social media companies. The NSF previously said it “has no role in content policies or regulations.” It declined to comment for this article.

Read the FreePress piece.  The extent to which government spent the past sixteen years working to shut you, me and all of us up should be a great wake-up call.