Trying to avoid being overly political, but how about banning a former US president? Trump has not yet (maybe he will one day?) been found guilty of any crime r

Trying to avoid being overly political, but how about banning a former US president? Trump has not yet (maybe he will one day?) been found guilty of any crime regarding the whole Jan 6 debacle. Yet we saw the accounts of Taliban members (who without a doubt took over a democratically elected government) and other nefarious folks still have their accounts up and active. Musk's bid was significantly over market value ($54.20) and above Goldman Sach's price target of $30. From my external viewpoint Twitter has a heavy political bias. As said by the current CEO: >“Where our role is particularly emphasized is who can be heard,” he went on. “And so increasingly our role is moving towards how we recommend content … how we direct people’s attention.” Dorsey I felt at times always tried to do the right thing. Not so sure about the current leadership. One has to assume if Musk was able to take over the company Parag Agrawal would be out very quickly. Twitter is not a neutral platform. It's funny how you never hear a Twitter insider ever defend or explain why the site appears to be so heavily internally manipulated. If the "wrong" thing hits the trending section it quickly drops off. Was it always just luck that the same 2-3 accounts were always the same top replies to anything Trump posted. Is this organic? Would love to know. Accounts like "Brooklyn Dad Defiant" was shown to have taken money from one particular political party. I recall seeing that guy almost always as the first reply to Trump's ramblings. How was his account boosted to such an extent? Seems fishy. Twitter's annoying dark patterns when it comes to viewing the site without logging in is the main reason why I avoid it more so than some political issue.