When Musk announced he was buying Twitter, the drama and delays were probably a stalling tactic to install traitors in the company, similar to how the deep state surrounded Trump with traitors. That being the case, they probably set things up to make it difficult to fire these people without issues (they'll sue Musk for firing them, or have other deals in place where they could cause irreparable harm to the company if they don't obey), so the firings would have to be for cause, and there'd have to be some way to mitigate expected sabotage. Like Jim Baker. Trump wasn't able to fire his traitors, because the government positions make them untouchable (He was setting up to change that with schedule F before the election was stolen from him). Musk probably has bad preexisting deals, like with the ADL and orgs like that, but if they break the deal, there's no longer a deal, and nothing to be held to. Like when the regressive orgs attacked Twitter's advertising after they promised not to. So I think that some of his bad policy decisions are those residual deals, and he's setting traps to get them to break those deals, and also for embedded traitors to do things that will get them fired for cause. I'm completely on the outside looking in, but that's what it looks like to me.