In any other moment, it would not be hard to understand why it's incredibly menacing to have elected officials supported by Silicon Valley publicly demanding that those mega-corporations use their monopoly power to silence adversaries. But as was true after 9/11, anything goes: https://twitter.com/RoKhanna/status/1347708745070030850

The way @FreedomofPress began was when Sen. Joe Lieberman abused his power as Chairman of the Homeland Security Committee to demand that banks & credit card companies terminate WikiLeaks' accounts. We created FPF to collect for WL & destroy that blockade: https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2012/dec/17/wikileaks-new-press-freedom-group

Having elected officials with power over tech companies direct those companies to censor those with different ideologies is despotic: a merger of state and corporate/monopolistic power.

But the 9/11 framework is in play: if you dissent from any of this, you're pro-Terrorist.

Beyond despotic, it's also cowardly.

Facebook and Google (through YouTube) have done far, far more than Parler to promote extremism, including what happened at the Capitol.

But politicians won't demand they be silenced because they own the Dem Party. Destroying Parler is easy.

Liberals (and a good chunk of their loyal allies on the left, though not all) are in full 9/11 mode:

* What good are all these fancy civil liberties if we're dead?

* This is a war. We can't afford free speech or due process.

* If you oppose our power, you're pro-Terrorist.

If all the telecommunications giants unite to announce liberals are banned from their telephone service because they spread conspiracies about Russia & promoted violent protests, and liberals scream censorship, tell them it's no big deal:

They can still communicate by telegram.