Twitter has now explained its decision, hours later, and the explanation is as stunning as the original act. First, it claims information whose obtainment has not been authorized - by those affected by it? - cannot be communicated on the platform

This by itself would undermine the foundations of a democratic society: the powerful and the privileged would be safely protected from every kind of scrutiny

Second, the cynicism is extraordinary: a network built and organized for the dissemination of unauthorized content has discovered it has reservations about it only in the case where the political stakes are exceptionally high

Everyone understood what the rationale for the decision was https://twitter.com/brhodes/status/1316530829393231873

Third, @jack admits twitter cannot explain its decisions. But on issues of fundamental importance for democracy making a decision and explaining it are exactly the same. You cannot decide if you can’t explain