The problem though, isn't what she said, it's how it really doesn't matter what she said IF someone can take it and make it fit the agenda.
I don't know what she meant by the mask comment. It MIGHT be anti-COVID mask, but the one I saw was really something somewhat different, implying - implying, not saying outright - that there was agenda behind some of the politicizing of the COVID reponse. That's not a controversial, nor should it be a fire-able - statement. Even if it was an anti-mask sentiment, are we now making subjective, qualitative judgments on everything anyone says? This is the definition of "mob mentality", because it presupposes a "right answer" for things that don't have an objectively right answer, only the flavor of the community in the moment.
Previously she wrote:
We need to clean up the election process so we are not left feeling the way we do today.
Put laws in place that protect us against voter fraud.
Investigate every state.
Film the counting.
Flush out the fake votes.
Require ID.
Make Voter Fraud end in 2020.
Fix the system.
Unless you're predisposed to assume that she means something in particular, I don't think there's anything terribly controversial there, either. If this was 2022 (i.e. not a Presidential election year) and, say, Bill Clinton said, "we need tighter laws that protect the integrity of the vote, so we don't go through another 2020", would anyone say he was advocating for Trump's nonsense? Nonsense!