So Twitter, as a private hosting platform, is the sole arbiter of what remains on its platform. Everyone using it signs, and must abide by, the same terms of service. This is a fact.

Angus King abides by the same TOS as Eric Brakley. According to the story King's team, not even King himself, reported Eric's account for a possible doctored video.

Posting doctored videos like what was alleged is against Twitter policy and TOS. This is also a fact.

So King's team, not King himself, reported the video. This act of reporting does nothing. This is not a magic genie lamp granting wishes, it's not a gun to some poor IT worker's head. It's not a threat, a bribe, a cajole, an extortion, or anything at all like that. It's literally a "Hey, sup?". It is now Twitter's job to investigate the matter and hold it to their totally legal, enforceable, and reasonable TOS. If Twitter decides it needs to be removed, or an account banned, it will decide that and make it happen.

So once again, where's the scandal when someone's team decides to, what they feel is, reasonably report something that possibly goes against a voluntary TOS to a private company? Where are they involved in the process of a private company making a decision to remove it and acting upon it? What's the difference between a politician using a feature as intended and a private citizen doing so, with the same results?