Does Merrick Garland need to appoint a Special prosecutor now?

[Celerity]

5. I massively doubt he would be even be nominated for the SCOTUS for at least 2 reasons

1. He is almost 70 years of age, far too old (he would be the oldest ever Justice nominated and then seated on the SCOTUS in US history, the only one older ever confirmed, William Smith, in 1837, declined to serve) and he would only end up being on the court for 15 to 20 years or so, max. We need someone in their 40's or early 50's, tops, as we cannot rely on Justices serving well into their late 80's and 90's.

2. I cannot see him getting enough votes from the Dem Senators, let alone the Rethugs (the Rethugs will never vote for a Dem nominee for SCOTUS again in enough numbers to overcome Dem dissenters (which there would be on Garland) on a vote, even if they have to stonewall for 7 years or even more, especially if they control the Senate, in which case a Dem nominee will never even see a vote), as we lost RBG, and Garland is far more moderate/conservative. The left half or so of the party would go bonkers.