It was perhaps a year ago that Scott Adams, who was clearly in a grim mood when he made his podcast, predicted that Donald Trump would lose in 2020. The basis for his prediction was the fact that the tech giants, having allowed Trump to have free access to the American public during the 2016 election, were not going to make that mistake a second time.

For a while there, it appeared that Adams might have been wrong, but, as the race narrows to two men (Trump versus either Biden or Bernie), the tech giants are starting to put their thumbs on the scale. More than that, they're trying to erase Trump entirely from the world of social media.

On Monday night's Tucker Carlson show, Harmeet K. Dhillon, a superb legal mind and free speech advocate, spoke with Tucker about how Big Tech is using its extraordinary power to silence Trump and his supporters:

There's a mention of #Zerohedge as well -- permabanned for reporting politically inconvenient facts about #coronavirus -- we are allowing tech oligarchs to shelter truths about China from consumers, smile & call it capitalism when in fact it is propaganda dressed up nicely. — Harmeet K. Dhillon (@pnjaban) March 10, 2020

There's no doubt that part of Big Tech's sudden aggression is due to the 9th Circuit's ruling in Google's favor in the suit Dennis Prager filed against it. Prager claimed that Google is so big that it is tantamount to a public utility and, as such, must accommodate free speech under the First Amendment. The court disagreed, holding that no matter how big Google is, it's still a private entity.

There are steps that Congress can take — but it can take those steps only if Trump can override Big Tech's censorship to retake the White House and get a Republican Congress. The cart, ironically enough, must go before the horse.

Assuming a glorious Republican victory in 2020, the first thing Congress should do is repeal Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act. This act immunizes online platforms for defamatory, fraudulent, or otherwise unlawful content that users put on those platforms. However, if the tech companies are going to control user content, then they're publishers and should not be immune to suit.

The 1964 Civil Rights Act offers another possible approach: