Senate Uglicans are arguing that absence of conclusive proof is conclusive proof of absence.

[eppur_se_muova]

Did these guys all blackout in Debate Club ?

Never mind that they tried as hard as they could NOT to find any evidence, even when it was shoved in their faces. This is basic debate prep, would be shot down in flames in any high school debate tournament.

And never mind that a seat on the SCOTUS should meet a higher standard than "well, we can't *really* prove he committed a violent crime, so whaddayagonnado ?". If there's **ANY** substantial doubt, another nominee should get his/her chance.

[Turbineguy]

1. They seem to filibustering to get their boy in.

[YessirAtsaFact]

2. He isn't qualified regardless

He doesn’t have the temperament to be a judge.

Frankly he should be removed from the bench altogether.

[WePurrsevere]

3. His easily proven PERJURY and horrible temperament...

should disqualify him, certainly for SCOTUS (as well as any bench) even sans the attempted RAPE and molestation bits.

They sure are extremely disparate to get him appointed and I'm almost positive that it has darn near zero to do with Roe vs Wade and everything to do with covering Trump's and their and their corp/rich/foreign owners from prosecution for crimes they've committed and/or assisted.