Okay, so now O'Neill's going on the air and saying that if what he says is untrue, then John Kerry should sue him, and more than one conservative pundit says that Kerry Needs to release his records in order to clear everything up. My question is, why should he? Doesn't the burden of proof lie with the accuser? Why should John Kerry have to devote a single iota of his time to disproving someone else's story? That would be like a prosecutor dragging someone into court and accusing them of stealing, and the court demanding that they either provide evidence of their innocence or admit their guilt. Yeah, I know the court of public opinion works a little differently, but that doesn't mean it's right.
No comments:
Post a Comment