Senator Kamala Harris of California has plummeted in the Democratic primary polls so fast over the summer that the one-time potential frontrunner has resorted to gimmicky tricks in order to sustain any media attention. Her latest cry for help is writing to Twitter CEO founder Jack Dorsey in an attempt to get the president of the United States banned from the social media site. On Tuesday night, Harris released a letter officially asking Dorsey to de-platform Donald J. Trump. The letter can be read below:
Harris uses a series of recent Trump tweets, mostly relating to the whistleblower and bogus impeachment trial, as reason for why Trump should be removed from the website. In her letter, she says what America needs is "civil society, not civil war" and claims the president is glorifying violence with his Twitter.
But Harris, oft justly accused of being an overzealous prosecutor who abuses her governmental power, is showing her true colors with her letter.
Tim Pool concisely described the situation.
"Presidential candidate pressures Tech CEO to shut down the legal and protected speech of her political rival," he tweeted.
Presidential candidate pressures Tech CEO to shut down the legal and protected speech of her political rival pic.twitter.com/mD0SYYKzjL— Tim Pool (@Timcast) October 2, 2019
Dave Rubin chimed in, "Kamala is the worst kind of authoritarian. She literally laughed at Biden during the debate when he said executive actions had to be constitutional."
Kamala is the worst kind of authoritarian. She literally laughed at Biden during the debate when he said executive actions had to be constitutional. https://t.co/IrKFNBMzNn— Dave Rubin (@RubinReport) October 2, 2019
Now, Harris is in the middle of a failing campaign. It is highly unlikely that Twitter will listen to her. But, the fact she thought this move would somehow appeal to average American voters should be alarming. Why would anybody want to vote for a presidential candidate who makes blocking free speech a cornerstone of their campaign? Why would a candidate actually suggest this idea? Well, the first reason is that Harris is desperate for attention. Campaigns do stupid things all the time for media airtime. But the second reason is a little bit more concerning. A candidate may only suggest silencing a president if she feels confident that America's respect for the First Amendment is slipping. The jury is still out on that, but it should be clear based off Harris and other recent Democratic policies that leftists certainly want to threaten free speech in the name of political correctness and their progressive agenda.