Byline: Ruth Marcus Washington Post
The Senate floor reverberated with the words of a courtroom Tuesday: the burden of proof and presumption of innocence. For senators on both sides, that rhetoric was a convenient way to avoid the unpleasant and politically unwise alternative of saying flatly whether Anita F. Hill or Clarence Thomas was lying.
The public furor over Hill's allegations that Thomas sexually harassed - and, perhaps even more important, the outcry over the Senate's perceived initial indifference to them - required senators to confront the issue.
The language of the law offered them a palatable way out.
Some senators said they believed law professor Hill, citing the vividness ofher …
Комментариев нет:
Отправить комментарий