As mentioned elsewhere, the laptop story was not restricted for being misinformation, it was restricted due to Twitter's policy (at the time) on hacked materials.
And, following the laptop story, Twitter changed their policy on hacked materials.
And that's the thing with content moderation - specific examples of content moderation often themselves go viral, but often also shed the actual context of said moderation (as was the case in your example), and thus feed into existing narratives around bias in content moderation. With full context, one might still disagree with the policy, but the narrative falls away.
Some background: https://www.techdirt.com/2020/10/16/twitter-fixes-bad-policy...
It was a policy that had previously received criticism, and had already come into play in a significant story: https://www.techdirt.com/2020/09/16/content-moderation-case-...
And, following the laptop story, Twitter changed their policy on hacked materials.
And that's the thing with content moderation - specific examples of content moderation often themselves go viral, but often also shed the actual context of said moderation (as was the case in your example), and thus feed into existing narratives around bias in content moderation. With full context, one might still disagree with the policy, but the narrative falls away.