If Amazon is breaking employment law or anti-monopoly law or anything else it can be fined or broken up. What it should not be is silenced.

I've quote the tweets below.

Warren has been campaigning to break up large tech companies.

What is so unprofessional about that? Clearly if she was to try and get them fined or broken up it would be through these laws.

She isn't silencing them. She's saying that there'll be consequences.

And Amazon's PR isn't a small company. They can take the heat.

I don't agree with you. A company that forces employees to piss in bottles and lies about it should have their lies face consequences.

Warren isn't removing their tweets. How are they being silenced?

Here is the quotes:

``` After she posted the video on Twitter, saying that companies like Amazon "pay close to nothing in taxes," the tech giant quickly fired back.

"You make the tax laws @SenWarren; we just follow them," it tweeted from its official news account.

"If you don't like the laws you've created, by all means, change them," it added.

Amazon said that it had paid "billions of dollars" in corporate taxes over the past few years alone.

Warren hit back, saying: "I didn't write the loopholes you exploit, @amazon – your armies of lawyers and lobbyists did.

"But you bet I'll fight to make you pay your fair share," she added. "And fight your union-busting. And fight to break up Big Tech so you're not powerful enough to heckle senators with snotty tweets." ```

Anyone should be able to heckle senators on twittwr! From Mark Zuckerberg to the homeless man in the nearby park!

If Amazon started running adverts about a giant space monkey that wanted to eat the moon, what would happen?

Care to explain it? Because it seems like the point of view advocated is "Politicans should not express views I don't like on social media"

Instead, she is going after amazon as a personal vendetta because she feels 'heckled'. She is explicitly attacking first amendment rights. It's a textbook case of corruption / abuse of power.

Like breaking up big tech companies is pretty much the only thing you hear about her in passing.

A personal vendetta against their twitter account just didn't start now.

Also this is corruption / abuse of power to you? You might want to get a new textbook.

It’s the “so you’re not powerful enough to heckle senators with snotty tweets” part that’s bad. Regardless of how you feel about her campaign to break up big tech, this is an appalling thing for a government official to say. I hate Twitter and Twitter culture as much as anyone, but “you shouldn’t be powerful enough to be snotty to a senator” is dystopian in my book.

US Senators should not be threatening retaliation against a company because of tweets that piss them off.

Why is this only bad when Trump or a Republican does it?

I presume the people that voted for Warren are on her side in this argument so she's being an advocate for their views.

Just because you think Amazon's employees being forced to piss in bottles isn't bad to you doesn't mean that others sees it as an injustice that makes people angry.

>Why is this only bad when Trump or a Republican does it?

Maybe treat each event on a case by case basis rather than a blanket rule?