I mean, look, I don't disagree. If you could bracket all of the political considerations, and the fact that timing here is significant, and you could just evaluate it as a moral issue, I think the nomination should be postponed, and a more thorough investigation should take place. (I said this at the beginning of this page of the thread, after all.)
I just happen to think that that you don't get much from imagining that hypothetical. Because this issue arose within a specific context, and it's merely hypothetical to imagine some other context in which it could've arisen. It makes it pointless to imagine what an unaffiliated person would do, because we live in a world where people are driven by their political affiliations and loyalties to do ridiculous and morally dubious stuff, and, yes, that's just as true of some Democrats as of some Republicans. In a less hypothetical world, the moral considerations and the political considerations aren't so easy to distinguish, and motivated reasoning is everywhere (and more common than "bad faith"). We can agree to disagree about that if you want.