President Trump has been nominating judges for lifetime appointments on the federal court system. And both Republicans and Democrats seem to agree that his choices are not ideal.

In just the past seven days, the Senate Judiciary Committee’s GOP chairman has requested that the White House not move forward with two of Trump’s candidates. Surprisingly, one of them has never before tried a case in court.

It isn’t just two candidates whose integrity and qualifications are coming into question, either. A third of the president’s candidates was struggling to answer simple questions regarding the basic fundamentals of law.

After making a particularly embarrassing presentation in front of the Senate Judiciary Committee, a video of the discourse made its way to the internet, garnering over 4.5 million views.

More embarrassingly, the questions for the nominee came from Sen. John Kennedy – a conservative Republican.

According to The Hill:

After learning from his questioning that Matthew Petersen, a nominee for the District Court for the District of Columbia, had not handled a jury trial and had probably taken five or fewer depositions, Kennedy bore down on him, asking Petersen about the last times he’d read either the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure or the Federal Rules of Evidence.

Petersen said that as a Federal Election Commission member, he didn’t need to read those federal standards on a “day-to-day basis.”

“As a trial judge, you’re obviously going to have witnesses. Can you tell me what the ‘Daubert standard’ is?” Kennedy then asked.

“I don’t have that readily at my disposal,” Petersen said of a rule regarding expert testimony in federal court.

“Do you know what a ‘motion in limine’ is?” Kennedy asked a moment later, referring to a request to exclude certain evidence in a trial.

Petersen said he hadn’t had time to “do a deep dive,” before later saying that he would “probably not be able to give you a good definition right here at the table.”

Liberal groups that have sought to excoriate Trump’s nominees reacted with a mix of glee and horror.

“This is humiliating for the Trump administration,” said Nan Aron, president of the liberal Alliance for Justice, commenting both on Petersen’s performance and the two nominees that Senate Judiciary Chairman Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) said should be withdrawn.

She also argued they are just the tip of the spear when it comes to flawed judicial nominees.

“Frankly, these three are problematic but they are not the only ones,” she said.

Not long after, the White House withdrew their nominations for Jeff Mateer and Brett Talley. This seems to be a smart move, considering Talley has never tried a case in court and was unanimously deemed unqualified by the American Bar Association.

Interestingly, it has also now come to light that Talley is also married to White House Donald McGhan’s chief of staff. Talley failed to add that his relationship with his wife may present a conflict of interest when filling out his questionnaire.

According to The Hill:

Kennedy told Yahoo News on Friday that Petersen should have been able to answer his questions.

“I enthusiastically supported President Trump for president, and I still do. In the past year, I have supported nearly every one of President Trump’s picks, but I don’t blindly support them,” he said.

“I ask questions that I expect them to be able to answer,” he continued. “In doing so, I’m just doing my job.