So,
the Washington Examiner posted an article about Hunter Biden's laptop for...some reason.
Specifically, they seem convinced that the letter signed by dozens of UN intel agents, all saying "this is a nonstory", was a plant to give Biden a fighting chance in the debates.
"Oh, Jordan has proof the laptop story was actually true?"
No.
"He has proof that Biden organized it?"
Actually, it sounds like he had evidence that Biden was in no way involved.
"What's on the laptop, anyway?"
Evidence of Biden's corruption.
"Oh, what evidence? What corruption?"
I don't know that anyone has ever said.
This NYPost article sure sounds outraged but doesn't seem to say about
what. The Republican talking point has shifted from "there is damning evidence against Biden on that laptop" to "the laptop physically exists and we're angry about that".
"Did the people who are this angry about the laptop's existence say anything about Clioton's aide's husband's laptop?"
I don't believe so, no.
"Did the people who are this angry about the laptop's existence say anything about Trump blackmailing Ukraine for drit on the Bidens? Because that sounds like the sort of thing they'd be angry about."
Some of them may have, probably. Jordan had something else to say.
Here's a 2019 article on the topic, where Jordan was trying to push on Jake Tapper vague unproven allegations of Hunter Biden's corruption that the Trump family was objectively doing in public. And
here's another 2019 article where Jim Jordan is defending Trump sending Guiliani to Ukraine.
In other words, even Biden's biggest critics with power and influence have nothing but
shouting. The only thing on the laptop was Grey Poupon and Benghazi.