In a very long-winded and theatrical way you are making the point that you believe that there are no credible alternatives out there. I believe there are. I believe that, as soon as any company puts their HQ and their servers in Europe they have a credibility-advantage over cloudflare right there on the legal front and on regulatory oversight.
I also don't believe that Mozilla has the ability to greatly influence the way Cloudflare would run their service, given that they're probably not paying a lot (or anything at all; don't know the particulars), and are unlikely to be a major component of Cloudflare's revenue. Cloudflare has much more to lose by picking a fight with the U.S. government (think government surveillance) or by pissing off major advertising networks and media corporations (think surveillance capitalism) who make up the lion's share of their revenue on Cloudflare's core webcaching business.
They do NOT want the list to go:
Cloudflare
Sketchy Valley Company with six months runway and no clear plan how to make a profit
The Actual Mob, really
Google
Great Britain's Ministry of Truth
Russian Media Company owned by Vladimir Putin
And then have news sites going "Why are all these obviously untrustworthy folks listed?" when the answer would be "Oh we heard that people didn't like the short list of actually trustworthy providers so we added all the other ones that we don't trust too!"