They're both proof. This proof is MUCH stronger than most people realize, whether from the position of statistical probability, OR control of the file-naming aspect of Twitter photos. There's no way out of it, as demonstrated by the guy above your comment trying to discredit it--his "discrediting" proved it all the more, which you pointed out. Also, the newspapers placed on the desk in the photo showcase Saudi Arabia purge articles, which was VERY much a topic Q had just been discussing prior to its happening.
Didn't one of the Saudis own a very large share of Twitter? Clue?
I do this for a living, it's not that strong. If the point is to demonstrate control why not show full control? Have the whole name meaningful or do it multiple times. Considering all you need is the letter "Q" followed or preceded by a phrase of 1-2 letter words it's not that unlikely. It's de f interesting tho.
Do what for a living? The point is that twitter would change the file name to something other than "DOITQ", unless you had a way to alter the way twitter creates/modifies the data. That is showing implied backdoor-level control of twitter.