Problem is, he thinks moderate means tolerating two extremes as opposed to being hostile to both extremes. There is speech made in bad faith and hostile intent and there is sincere exchange of thoughts.
The better approach is to let the leader decide. The classical approach was to let things stay and let people form their own opinion. Then big tech started to moderate content more strictly and in my opinion with political intend. I believe the classical approach worked better.
It's a private company, of course the leader decides. But being a publicly accessible platform it poses a danger to the public when it promotes extremism. If the leader decides then the leader is responsible even with the penalty of prison time when people get hurt as a result of poort moderation.
Like I said in my comment, intent is important. If you say something with the intent of harming someone it is as if you actually harmed them. This is why planning to kill, steal or defraud is a serious crime. Elon himself should be banned for some of his actions on the platform. I see no proof of political moderation on twitter but even if there is it is easily fixable. Just replace people. These social media companies need a mandated moderation officer accountable to the DoJ really.
What pisses me off the most is how people don't understand how precious democracy and your country are. These companies are destroying them and like that in a day all of this will be gone for good.
