You really have a poor understanding of what would constitute proof. I'm am amazed at your lack of analytical ability. Cut your losses and go back to watching your BSNBC.
I did, dumbass. He'd still have to prove the accusations are false. What part of that don't you understand?
My side of which? Cain should sue Bialak (SP) based on her press conference? Unless he can some how prove that she never met with him 14 years ago there is no way to prove slander. Or, barring that, unless Cain has a witness in this case that was there at the point were the alleged harrassment took place. The burden of proof is on him, not her. He cannot prove her words are not the truth. Of course, she could admit she is lying. Otherwise, it would be impossible for Cain to prevail in such a suit.
Fair enuf. I would file even if it cost me money, simply because she is a lying bitch. I would say, in my no nonsense, Malcolm X, way of saying that we will not be non-violent with anyone who is violent with us, that this will not be tolerated. I would drag her in front of a judge on GP. That will make others think twice. It is like living in the hood. If someone bigger than you hits you, you try to knock their block off. Same principle.