I'm not trying to give him a "pass." I agree he's despicable. I think it's also quite possible he'll be charged for criminal offenses and possibly removed from office before his term is up. I would not call any of that "giving him a pass."
I think some of these businesses need a new definition. Social media giants, for instance, have kind of become the public square in which people communicate. The world actually relies on them, and the tech giants in general, for communication and information. They have ascended into a new as yet defined category. That a new grouping hasn't been made for them is why they can seize power but behave as if they are just these private businesses exercising their rights. The banks also have massive power and control globally. The power all of these entities have is why they need a new (or several new) categories under the law. I see what they are doing as "cheating" and gradually weakening the powers of government, which is the only entity that actually can truly protect citizen rights.The law says that you can't discriminate by race, color, creed, etc. It says nothing about having to give your business to people charged with insurrection.
The law distinguishes between criminal and civil penalties.
How they treat powerful people matters because it's a clue to how they will also treat less powerful ("everyday" people) who can't afford to spend tons of money defending themselves in the courts, and what they can get away with doing.