I understand now, apologies.

I agree with you, that public anger still exists[1], but I will not consider that link I mentioned in my response as an example of the suppression of public anger.

A new law that specifically calls out people as criminals when they attempt to limit a person from entering their place of worship, etc is not a law suppressing the expression of public anger.

======================

[1] One can even make the argument that Trump got elected on the back of public anger. The values he espoused are unpalatable, but there is little question that the whole suppression of opinions in the last decade have had much to do with his popularity.