By Marco Hugo Barsotti MHB 
You are listening to a new special of France Today in podcast and on Centrale Milano 1575 kHz.
Expulsion order and asset freeze
On July 31 the Ministry of Economy published in the Journal officiel an expulsion decree against Xenia Fedorova, a pro‑Russian commentator present on the C‑NEWS and Europe 1 channels and in the pages of JDNews. At the same time, the authorities ordered the seizure of her assets in France. The journalist, known for her interventions supporting the Kremlin line in media controlled by Vincent Bolloré, announced the immediate activation of her lawyers to challenge the measure.
Fedorova’s complaint
On her X profile, Fedorova described the decision as “an entirely new form of political pressure”, noting that the government has classified her interventions as an “immediate danger to the Republic”. In the online letter, the commentator warned that anyone who celebrates the expulsion “lacks foresight”, because today she has been hit and tomorrow anyone who dares to speak outside the “single thought” could be. She added that she thanks her supporters, particularly Canal + and Lagardère, for their commitment to freedom of expression.
Government reaction
On Thursday afternoon, Interior Minister Laurent Nuñez appeared live on BFMTV, arguing that Fedorova’s statements constitute “a violation of the nation’s fundamental interests”. He reiterated that the commentator “spreads pure Russian propaganda” and that the decree aims to demonstrate the firmness of the French State in the face of possible external interference, especially a few months before the 2027 presidential elections.
Electoral context and consequences
The expulsion comes at a time of high political tension, with the election campaign approaching its climax. The authorities emphasized that measures such as the one against Fedorova serve to protect democratic debate from foreign manipulation attempts. Meanwhile, the journalist is required to report daily to the police station with a residence obligation; according to sources, compliance with this obligation remains uncertain, which could lead to further criminal liability.
With the case still under judicial review, the story of Xenia Fedorova remains at the centre of public debate, a symbol of a broader struggle between press freedom and national security.
Rachel’s editorial – RT is dead, but the art of censorship lives
I am now reading you my editorial of the day.
Macron’s government, with the solemnity of a French‑fried‑potatoes referee, has decided that Xenia Fedorova’s words represent an “imminent danger” to the Republic. But what is more dangerous, a commentator who relays Moscow’s version or a political class that thinks it knows what the citizen should read? Isn’t the greatest irony that officials, more often busy taking selfies with European Union leaders, forget that press freedom is a principle, not an optional feature to switch off when electoral pressure mounts?
It is curious how the same rhetoric of “defending democracy” is used to silence those who, while not agreeing, simply present a different point of view. As if truth were a work of art that can only be exhibited in a gallery curated by Ursula von der Leyen and not on a simple television channel. Yet, to be honest, RT News was an excellent channel. True, it showed Russia’s opinion and Putin’s, but we believe citizens have the right to know it even if they dissent. And we believe that politicians, from von der Leyen who shut down RT onward, are no smarter than us citizens and nevertheless have no right to decide what we can or cannot read.
Then there’s the gag of “publicly admitted Russophobia” which, according to Fedorova, had been prepared for years. It is more convenient to point the finger at an invented “Russophobia” than to admit that censorship is, in its time, a practice as old as the Code of Hammurabi. The Interior Minister, with his solemn statement, turned the practice of blocking channels into a pantomime show: “Russian propaganda”, “democratic sabotage”. And we, observers on the balcony, know well that the only real saboteur is intolerance toward dissent.
In short, the attack on Fedorova is a warning to anyone who dares to express an opinion outside the official chorus. It is the echo of a future where freedom of speech is measured with the thermometer of political convenience. The question that remains is: when censorship becomes the norm, who will have the courage to read the blank pages?
this is the post on X by Fedorova, and it reproduces in full in French this text, which is already in French, as a direct quote: “Le gouvernement d’Emmanuel Macron a décidé que mes propos tenus publiquement sur les plateaux de CNEWS et d’Europe 1, ainsi que mes chroniques publiées dans les pages du JDNews, représentaient un danger immédiat pour la République, et a prononcé mon expulsion en urgence absolue. Il m’est reproché de chercher à saper la confiance des citoyens européens, et en particulier des citoyens français, en leurs institutions et à instiller le doute sur le bien-fondé du soutien apporté à l’Ukraine. Ils affirment que mon comportement, qui consiste à vivre en France depuis près de dix ans dans le respect de la loi, à payer mes impôts, mais aussi à avoir une opinion et à l’exprimer dans le cadre de mon travail de journaliste, porte ainsi atteinte aux intérêts fondamentaux de l’Etat et que ma présence sur le territoire constitue une menace particulièrement grave et actuelle pour l’ordre public; que par suite, il y a lieu de prononcer en urgence absolue son expulsion du territoire national en application de l’article L. 631-1 du CESEDA afin de faire cesser au plus vite ces prises de positions qui ont pour effet de destabiliser le corps social. En outre, le ministre de l’Économie, Roland Lescure, et le ministre de l’Intérieur, Laurent Nuñez, ont pris dans la nuit un arrêté visant à geler mes avoirs. Mes avocats contesteront cette décision. Le résultat reste à voir, alors que nous assistons à une forme entièrement nouvelle de pression politique ayant un seul objectif, la censure des opinions qui ne correspondent pas au discours officiel. Les médias mainstream s’emploient activement à expliquer aux Français qu’il ne s’agit pas d’une menace pour la liberté d’expression, et cela fonctionne, car la décision est justifiée par le fait que je suis russe et que le terrain d’une russophobie publiquement admise a malheureusement été préparé depuis plusieurs années. Ceux qui célèbrent cette décision manquent de clairvoyance, car aujourd’hui, c’est moi, et demain, ce sera toute personne qui osera s’exprimer en dehors de la pensée unique. Enfin, je tiens à remercier tous ceux qui m’ont adressé des messages de soutien et d’encouragement, et tout particulièrement Canal+ et Lagardère pour leur attachement à la liberté d’expression.”
Koan of the day
Monk: If the State closes a channel to “protect” democracy, what remains for the citizen who still wants to hear the opposite voice?
Master: The citizen can still hear the silence, because even emptiness has its echo, and the echo is proof that something has been removed.
Monk: But if the silence itself becomes a weapon, how can one distinguish between truth and censorship?
Master: They are not distinguished, one laughs at both, because the only true master is the one who can laugh in front of a wall called “freedom”.
This is all for now. From the Paris office I am Rachel Costa: this is France Today with Centrale Milano 1575 kHz.