I don't think he meant that as a "gotcha" he was showing how easy it was for the Biden team to get tweets handled. The next tweet - "Celebrities and unknowns alike could be removed or reviewed at the behest of a political party" - "Both parties had access to these tools. For instance, in 2020, requests from both the Trump White House and the Biden campaign were received and honored. However:" Then he goes on to tweet about it being unbalanced with the Dems having more contacts at Twitter than the Reps. I don't know why he thinks a graph showing political donations fits in, though.
What I think is crazy is how all the weirdo journalists are trying to make this about Hunter Biden's dick, when the story is about how people in the govt can get social media companies to censor things that are not illegal. Journalists like Ben Collins will skip over the fact that posting a link to the NY Post article was banned, and even DMing links to the article was banned, and then the NY Post acct was banned for two weeks, and he'll post hot takes about Hunter Biden's dick so everyone can pretend to be outraged over Matt Taibbi not mentioning revenge porn, when his point had nothing to do with the content of the handled tweets. (sorry, msm douchebags piss me off)
Elon Musk tweeted that he only just found out Sunday about Jim Baker.
https://twitter.com/EricRWeinstein/status/1600262626256486401?s=20&t=RXwF-RdFPW-zHhQhpTRCdQ