Thanks Tim, I believe I acknowledged that eyewitness testimony is indeed evidence and it was not a trial but the overall process must surely be just and seen to be so otherwise as soon as any untrue accusation or deliberate slander is made against a potential candidate, they would be obligated to withdraw. Elle Beau made the point that 2400 law professors objected to him but with apparently over 60% of American academics committed to Marxism (as in attending a conference), it is hardly surprising to me and does nothing to convince me of the legitimacy of their criticism. One Cornell professor said he was upset because he was challenged by a woman, that is hardly defensible for someone with such qualifications — more likely he was upset because it was slanderous and untrue.
I agree with you that he was not a particularly conservative choice which emphasises my point that this was politically motivated abuse of the process. As for the Senate being able to “approve a more conservative justice” I believe I made the point in answering another response that should there be even a whiff of christian about a candidate I believe we would have charges of LGBT-phobic, fundamentalists and bigots all over CNN. Hopefully, and rightfully so as you are an American with more faith in your political process, I will be proved wrong after the most senior judge retires shortly.