I realize you were using it as a rhetorical device, but ending on a nasty insult as you did crosses way over the line, and also made the violence part a little more ambiguous than just "rhetoric".
As for misinformation, everyone has a different definition of that word based on what they personally believe to be true or false. That's not a meaningful basis for moderation. It's for the community to hash out what's true and what's false, not moderators to impose their views (or your views, or any other user's views) on everyone else.
This user literally attributed the bailouts to the wrong President for malicious reasons (see the political posts they make elsewhere). That seems like misinformation to me.
I appreciate you walking the line here, you have a hard job, but I just can’t be here watching evil people try and warp reality with actual lies while “nothing can be done”.
Meanwhile his lie is still up there and my tiny insult and fake violence is missing. I guess we care more about feels than reals here?
No, that doesn't follow. What follows is that you should avoid low blows, so-called "tiny insults"*, and castigating "evil people" on HN—such perceptions are notoriously unreliable, and mostly result in reverse flames from people functioning the same way, just from the opposite point of view.
Instead, what you should do is respond to wrong information with correct information, neutrally and in a way that the rest of us can learn something from. Then you've contributed something good to the community. If you can't do that or don't want to, the other option is to simply not post.
Responding aggressively doesn't help—it only makes things worse. Nor is it in your interests, because to the extent that the audience is persuadable, aggressive comments like what you posted will sway them against your own position. If you happen to be right, that means that you've discredited the truth, which hurts everyone (https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&sor...).
* Everyone always underestimates the badness of their own infractions (e.g. "tiny") and overestimates the badness of others' (e.g. "evil"). If one weights each of those biases at 10x, that's a 100x distortion. No conversation can endure that sort of communication gap. https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&que...
As for misinformation, everyone has a different definition of that word based on what they personally believe to be true or false. That's not a meaningful basis for moderation. It's for the community to hash out what's true and what's false, not moderators to impose their views (or your views, or any other user's views) on everyone else.