You've got Kathy Griffin tweeting photos a decapitated Trump head (https://twitter.com/kathygriffin/status/1323893513226870786) which gets no penalty or ban. This isn't glorifying violence?
Yet, people on the right are being banned daily without explanation for things much less egregious.
EDIT: if you disagree, maybe try having a conversation instead of downvoting.
Imagine if Trump had tweeted a photo of any Democrat's decapitated head, do you think the reaction would have been the same?
They do, though. (or rather, they did... I honestly have no idea what state their rules are in today, but they've changed some things) It's the only reason Trump was allowed to stay on Twitter as long as he was, and Twitter were transparent about that. [1]
https://blog.twitter.com/en_us/topics/company/2018/world-lea...
> It's the only reason Trump was allowed to stay on Twitter as long as he was
But here we have the data point of Kathy Griffin's tweet staying up while Trump's tweets are taken down and blocked. So I'm saying that datapoint, that tweet by Kathy Griffin staying up, does not fit your "Twitter lets leaders get away with more" explanation. That tweet from Kathy Griffin should have been removed faster than Trump's tweets, but it's still there.
In contrast we cannot choose to stop using the US government. Would you really prefer to have the US government decide what can and cannot be censored?
Seems fair- after all it is voted by all citizens, not just by the ones that make more noise. Also, there are the citizens' representatives in the parliament, who openly discuss issues and try to establish widely agreed-upon rules.