It's not about suppressing - she spoke freely, and inadvisedly. The consequences of this were a man losing his job and a big backlash. This made it difficult

It's not about suppressing - she spoke freely, and inadvisedly. The consequences of this were a man losing his job and a big backlash. This made it difficult for her to do her job effectively, lowering her value to her company to zero (and probably a large negative). I don't see that SendGrid was acting to suppress her free speech. Instead, they were writing down an asset that had declined radically in value.