[at_a_remove]

I guess I will break all of this down for you, since you did ask.

1) Twitter calls for public input on their approach to their handling of accounts of government officials. This individual is a government official and this is an instance of handling their account.

2) Well-timed. They called for this input on March 18th. This instance of account handling is from March 19th, approximately one day later. This makes it "more relevant," given that it was not, say, six years ago.

So, I offered this data because it was topical and timely to the discussion at hand. Rather than a hypothetical, it exists as a real instance of how Twitter as a corporation handles the Twitter accounts of government leaders. If I were to discuss the price of tea in China back in 1887, that would not be topical or timely.

[GrinningFool]

This may be all be true[1], but none of it explains your "nothing to see here" trailing remark.

[1] Though there's activity on her account from 15 hours ago. In addition if someone is banned from Twitter, doesn't Twitter take their tweets offline/hide them?

[at_a_remove]

Oh, the trailing remark is because Twitter has long had the habit of "whoops the algorithm did it!" happening as the most convenience of excuses when the timing is suspicious.

I don't know what Twitter does with people's tweets. Frankly, I find the platform almost too chaotic to look at for more than a few seconds. It feels like a roomful of ping-pong balls with text on them, whizzing at your head, only loosely clustered.