I’ll be honest, I wasn’t much bugged by Twitter deplatforming President Trump. I didn’t think it was cool, and it bothered me that a company displays such brazen arrogance, but I agree with the ACLU’s ultra-liberal Ira Glasser, who said a President always has plenty of speaking outlets.I was uber-bugged—outraged, in fact—when Amazon killed Parler’s access to the Internet altogether and, if antitrust laws mean anything, Amazon should be facing severe scrutiny in this regard.But Twitter? I was just annoyed and, of course, I’ve long been frustrated by Twitter’s ongoing and disingenuous Leftist agenda: “We’re just neutral content hosts. We don’t favor either side, but we do enforce a certain narrative because that narrative is true, so we block other narratives because they’re false.” (Nevermind that in the philosophical field of “narratives,” the premise is that none of them are true.)But overall? I wasn’t outraged by Twitter’s decision.What We Know about DorseyJack Dorsey is to blame, of course, but let’s acknowledge a few things about Dorsey:1. He founded Twitter 14 years ago. It now has 4,600 employees and 321 million users. That’s shocking growth. Dorsey can’t entirely control that company as a practical matter, and he can’t control it as a legal matter since he’s a minority stockholder.2. He is presumably surrounded by Leftists, many of them far Left.3. He himself was raised Catholic and his uncle is a priest.4. He supported Tulsi Gabbard (my favorite candidate) in 2020.5. He also supported Andrew Yang (my second favorite candidate, but far behind Tulsi because of his troublesome trademark (the universal income)). Based on Wikipedia, those are the only two he supported in the primaries.6. He is a huge Bitcoin fan.I think it all points to a guy who is a libertarian who leans left, not an unhinged SJW leftist.Sure, I could be wrong, but let’s look at that series of Tweets he sent out a few days ago that rankled so many people. Here’s a link to the string.In it, he says he felt it was necessary to ban Trump because of real public danger. I tend to disagree with him, but I don’t think it’s right to call him a “liar.” If Twitter hadn’t been so dishonest in its censorship for the past few years, I think most of us would’ve accepted his explanation at face value (that was an ugly display at the Capitol building).But after defending their decision, Dorsey tweeted something very interesting: He said that he has long maintained that, if people don’t like Twitter’s rules, they could go elsewhere, but that Amazon’s decision to kill Parler “challenged” this concept.Let that sink in.