Twitter's strength is in its open discussion model. Not the opposite. When I was a kid, I remember my dad and I walking in NYC and we came around a corner and saw a bunch of Nazi supporters (real Nazi supporters, not the "I don't like what you have to say, you Nazi" bullshit) marching in the street. Wide open, right down the street. Almost everyone ignored them. My dad said "see those crazies? You never want to be around them, you never want to believe anything they say, they are scum." Allow all ideas out in the open so people can see for themselves who is crazy and who is legitimate. Force ideas to hide in darkness and in the corners and it becomes taboo, and people end up believing there is a reason beyond the crazy that you're censoring it.
When you prohibit something, you make it a "forbidden fruit". It raises interest to the forbidden matter. It is counterproductive. It may "work" short term. Long term it definitely won't. As evidenced by continuing Trump popularity in spite of all the efforts by Twitter, Facebook and the leftist media. If you don't like Trump - let him bury himself with some of his (admittedly) intemperate, wrong and ill advised outbursts. But no, you made a martyr out of him. Good move.
How much do you want to bet the government puts pressure on his other companies "all of a sudden" to make him lose interest in Twitter?
On a related note, great idea by democrats. An official Ministry of Truth. Of course, after they lose power and the Republicans take over, it'll be cause for more weeping and gnashing of teeth. If this is true (and I have no idea if it is) it bodes ill for all of our futures.