>

Oh my god I don’t care.  
Let the fbi do their jobs.
Can we maybe spend time investigating price gouging?
My favorite thing about the Hunter Biden stuff is, at least with the "laptop", you have to be committed to believing all of the following, in order and in totality:

Hunter flew a laptop "containing evidence of his crimes" 2700 miles from Southern California to Delaware in the summer of 2019.
He took a water damaged laptop with evidence of his crimes to a computer repair shop in Delaware but left no payment method.
He took a water damaged laptop with evidence of his crimes to a computer repair shop in Delaware but left no contact method.
He took a water damaged laptop with evidence of his crimes to a computer repair shop in Delaware but never attempted to retrieve it.
There are no internal or external cameras in the repair shop to prove who dropped off the laptop.
The man accepting the laptop is blind, and could not see people, but could see a small sticker on the laptop.
That sticker meant the laptop could only belong to Hunter Biden and no one else.
The blind man was also a fervent MAGA supporter.
The blind MAGA supporter began working on the laptop for which he had not been paid, for a customer that he could not contact.
The blind MAGA supporter found EvIdEnCe oF CrImEs, but did not call the police.
The blind MAGA supporter found EvIdEnCe oF CrImEs, but did not call the FBI.
The EvIdEnCe oF CrImEs mostly consist of emails, voicemails, and .pdfs of multiple photos, and image scans of documents, which have had all of their metadata stripped and whose origins are untrace-able (and therefore rendered generally not admissible in court as evidence)
The blind MAGA supporter found the EvIdEnCe oF CrImEs, and called Rudy Giuliani personally.
Rudy Giuliani takes the laptop (and holds it from the summer of 2019, to the fall before the 2020 election). And therefore generally rendering the "laptop" inadmissible as evidence in court.
While the laptop is in Rudy's possession on the east coast, it is accessed four times from a west-coast IP range, and three new folders are added to the laptop, once of which was labelled "Salacious Pictures Package". The others were "Mail" and "Big Guy File" (ooo, potentially inserting false EvIdEnCe oF CrImEs, perhaps?)
Trump's DOJ eventually subpoenas and obtains the laptop before the 2020 election.
Republicans controlled the House, Senate, Supreme Court, White House, and the DOJ, and possessed the laptop, but declined to charge Hunter Biden with anything.
In fact, a Republican-led Senate investigation in 2020, chaired by Ron Johnson, found no wrongdoing by Hunter Biden in relation to his ties to Ukraine and Burisma.
The New York Post releases the Hunter Biden laptop story, but no one is willing to publish their name to say they worked on it.
Fox News declines to run the Hunter Biden laptop story out of disbelief in the integrity of the sourcing.
The blind MAGA supporter that found EvIdEnCe oF CrImEs later said that "there have been multiple attempts (after having taken possession of the laptop) to remotely insert questionable material onto the laptop, and passing off this misinformation or disinformation as originally coming from the laptop".
The blind MAGA supporter that found EvIdEnCe oF CrImEs, who admitted there were multiple attempts to remotely place questionable material onto the laptop to pass off as genuine, says that while looking at the contents of the laptop, "he saw a lot of photos, but he did not see a lot of the photos that are reported to have been seen". And that some of the stuff that he did originally see, wasn't there anymore.

You gotta get through that, and think, "yep, this is all above board and factually legitimate" >

While I concur with EVERYTHING you’ve written, I want to add that even the story of the laptop has changed. Most specifically around who the repair shop owner gave the laptop to. For example, there’s your scenario that you listed about him giving it to Rudy. There’s also a narrative that he gave it to a GOP Deleware operative and finally, there’s a narrative that he gave it to the FBI.
There’s also a few narratives about whether it was one laptop or two, or one laptop and a hard drive, or one laptop and the computer repairman made a copy of that hard drive.
I’ve read multiple accounts of these scenarios above and I cannot find one consistency. Even Giuliani has mentioned that he has two hard drives that belong to Hunter. 
I did read an article that the author interviewed the repairman, and his story was that he gave it directly to the FBI. He made no mention of making copies of the hard drive, which then begs the question of. How did Giuliani ultimately get his paws on it? >

Yep, I've also heard three different variations of who Jon Paul Mac Isaac contacted, upon discovering the "bad things on the laptop":
"The FBI called me", "I've been emailing with the FBI", and "The FBI sent a field agent from Baltimore".
He was unable to follow up with any specifics, and when pressed, apparently devolved into the "I went with Rudy because he's my lifeguard and I don't want to turn up like Seth Rich" >

Sounds conveniently like 'okay we planted the evidence, now call him and tell him the fbi will be coming to get it' to me. >

It must be so surreal to Hunter Biden that so many old guys want to see his penis and are essentially holding hearings about it within the halls of Congress. >

This will be Benghazi 2.0 with endless hearings intended to smear/weaken political opponents. There were something like 10 hearings/investigations into the Benghazi attack, including one done by a House select committee. I expect something similar here. >

If you are a source for breaking stories, the very least we should require is proof of your claims. We’re past “misinformation” at this point, and any public, online forum should be legally required to vet their posts or subject to massive fines. You simply cannot allow the public to have access false stories. We’ve lost the ability to tell truth from fiction. The first amendment is a great idea, but we’ve let it ride for almost 250 years. It’s time for an update. >

Not specific to Hunter, but at this point I'm honestly starting to question whether some public figures regularly consent or authorize this misinformation being posted on their behalf, with permission, or via an agent's authorization. Possibly even to "prove a point." That raises an interesting question: are some of these stories potentially "authorized" and what are the ramifications if authorized  misinformation is circled by the public after being published by a client acting on behalf of an agent or portfolio of clients.  
I speculate this may be probably in the news entertainment industry seeing as you rarely see actual legal recourses taken, like basic C&Ds. Nor do you really see serious attempts to lobby changes to these practices - despite it obviously being something that seem to make a lot of people 'unhappy.' >

Doing nothing to actually solve problems for the American people.  Focussing their new power on exposing inappropriate nude pictures of Hunter Biden.  Talk about a bunch of groomers.  Just sick and twisted retrumplican crap. >

My fave is that the right has claimed there is cp on the laptop and instead of turning it into police, Rudy held onto it for a year.  Makes sense. >

Rudy had to review it for legitimacy. 3-400 times daily >

My favorite part of these "investigations" are the White Boards.    It's like kindergarten PowerPoint.  :-)   
I like to imagine that some congressional intern had to go down to Office Depot and buy a couple sheets of poster board, Elmer's glue sticks and a package of rainbow magic markers. Then they spend like 4 hours cutting out and gluing down blown up pictures of Hunter Biden's dazzling sturdy  one-eyed trouser snake. 
Gotta make that shiznit professional as possible.
3D lettering, fringe tassels and glitter are optional. >

The whole laptop story is such a fucking nothingburger. >

Have they touched on that airtight chain of custody yet, or are they going to save it for later? >

Fox news speculated that Biden would not shoot down the Chinese balloon because it had evidence on Hunter's laptop. That laptop sure gets around. >

Hunter should appear at the hearing and just whip his junk out and take no questions. >

Most people do not give a damn about these "investigations". We should call it what it is, political theater. People will not chime in because it is just dumb. Then the right will cry "media is not covering this because they are trying to hide the truth". >

I mean, I prefer that they waste their own time with this nonsense rather than their usual schtick of trying to destroy democracy. >

Making up excuses to attack your opposition is how you dismantle democracy and is straight out of the fascist playbook. >

Hunter Biden isn't even their opposition, though.... he's effectively just a random private citizen. >

It absolutely doesn't resonate with me, but apparently the Republican base laps it up. 
I don't think the Hunter Biden investigation is meant to influence Democrats. >

Lolwut >

They really want people to see Hunters dong for some reason. It’s literally all they think about. >

Of course they want to crucify the offspring of a political rival while protecting their own. 
You can't shame, surprise, or correct these conservatives (including their supporters)  using gotcha moments and hypocrisy. Every single issue - you can catch the right making disingenuous arguments. They don't care. Coherence and consistency of rhetoric and action is not their goal. Power and hegemony are their goals, and hypocrisy is just one strategy for accomplishing it. In fact, it's become a sport for them: rack up the most points, and any opposition focused on your words will never be able to hold you accountable for your actions. Kayfabe and theatrics. 
I beg everyone. Stop focusing so much on gotchas, and instead focus on getting out the vote. Focus on right-wing violence, treason, tolerance of domestic terrorists, and apathy for real problems affecting middle and lower-class Americans. Pointing out hypocrisy does almost nothing - it arguably makes it worse. The people you accuse don't care. Reactive discourse like "Trump says X, but does Y" is not a viable strategy for promoting political agendas. We need to focus on issues, and not the hypothetical positions of our opponents. Promote the bolstering of our voting rights, climate change readiness/mitigation, infrastructure development, education, worker's rights, non-violence, and affordable healthcare.
A brief list of conservative "positions" that they pretend to care about (and in fact glibly appreciate for the frustrating effect it has on discourse): 

"Pro-Life" Except in the case of homeless, unviable pregnancies, wars, children in poverty, refugees, domestic violence, mass shootings, affordable healthcare and medicine, queer/trans suicides...
"Pro sexual decency" except in the case of decades worth of right-winger sexual assault/rape scandals, lawsuits, accusations, pedophilia, affairs, pornography use, and sex trafficking....
"Anti-elite" except in the case of dictators, oligarchs, (conservative) billionaires, Wall Street...
"Pro-freedom" except in the case of access to certain books, certain forms of expression, certain causes for protest, certain religions, certain forms of dress...
"Pro rule of law" except in the case of wealthy conservative sex offenders, tax fraud/dodgers, voter fraud, espionage, treason, political violence, environmental laws, democratic processes, police violence, abuse of the legal/appeals system, violating established legal precedent...
"Fiscally responsible" except in the case of subsidies to unsustainable industries, ignoring climate change's economic impact, funding for programs to alleviate costs for raising families, investing in education to compete in a global economy, debt ceiling negotiations...
"Pro religion" except in the case of literally anything other than their specific evangelical niche, and ignoring Christ's call to be kind/tolerant/accepting/loving/patient/respectful of the environment...
"Pro Constitution" except when it comes to parts of it they don't like (separation of church & state, 4th amendment, 1st amendment, 8th amendment, 'well regulated militias', 14th amendment) ...
"Pro family" except in the case of keeping children with their parents, or letting 2 capable parents in a civil union adopt, affordable housing, healthcare costs, rightwing politician affairs, medical care and affordable groceries...
"Pro small government" except when it comes to bathrooms, flag laws, protest laws, children's sports, public & school libraries, marriage laws, immigration laws, sexual/reproductive health...
"Pro truth" except when it comes to climate change, foreign propaganda, medical science, legal theories, lying conservative politicians, American history...
"Pro USA" except when it comes to polluting our water/soil/air/national parks, protecting our people from a virus, defending ourselves from foreign dictators' influence, respecting the ideals of democracy, support of international dictators in NK/Russia/China/Saudia Arabia/etc...
"Pro rural" except when it comes to primarily supporting wealthy urban elites, multinational media conglomerates, devastation of rural infrastructure and economies, development of rural educational infrastructure...

In effect what you have is a wealthy elite that have weaponized social media in order to outsource their own PR/propaganda/public defense to gullible and disaffected individuals. The fascist engine works by transmuting populist anger (partially created by wealth inequality and stoked social issues) into focused political power - a "strong" authoritarian leader. If you look at what right wingers say vs what they ignore, only one viable conclusion emerges: The rhetoric is a smokescreen. They only care about power, preservation of power, and withholding of power from people they don't like. And they'll use any rhetoric to mask the fascist desires lurking in the muck of their souls, even if it means contradicting themselves 10 seconds later. All the while contributing to a festering crab-bucket mentality that drives intra-class conflict. 
Don't look for logical or semantic consistency across fascists' statements and beliefs: the real commonalities are who they affect in that moment: protecting themselves and their in-groups, or hurting anyone that "threatens" that. And by the way some behave, existence alone can seem a threat. 
But, it literally doesn't pay to point hypocrisies out. You can do so, but there's no guarantee your interlocutor won't ignore it/twist words/deflect/change topics/smile glibly at the visible frustration on your face as truth and meaning erode in front of you. They either can't recognize the chasm between their words and actions, or they willfully ignore it. And if years of headlines pointing out hypocrisy haven't led them to reconsider, we have to accept that it's intentional. Continuing to broadcast the hypocrisies reinforces the right's beliefs that they are an effective tactic of choking/controlling discourse, and shows them that they can keep getting away with evil actions because we only hold them accountable for their words.
The way to fight them is not to engage with the elites of the movement - but to push back at friends and relatives who support the movement. Ignore the hypocritical drivel they push, hammer away more pressing issues, and leverage your social power for good. The Soap Box will be a lot more impactful than the ballot box in the long term. >

The bar for Republican plausible deniability has never been lower. This is all gaslighting - a desperate swing for false equivalency and self-victimization. These are bad faith hearings - lies. Republicans are waging war on the United States from inside our own government. Defy them. >

I really hope that pics of Hunter's massive dong get entered into the official record. Not even LBJ got that! >

Twitter files and Hunter Biden two things that mean nothing to me >

So, whose intern is picking up the blown up, blurred pic of Hunter’s junk from Kinko’s for these hearings? >

This shit is gonna get really old really fucking fast. >

Oh we're having hearings about selectively released documents that show basically nothing now?