This assumption is not necessarily true and what he should have looked for was any evidence to prove Communist connections. This type of fallacy should not be used to make vital decisions as far as some cases are concerned. However in cases where the burden of proof is put on the prosecutor to prove the defendant to be guilty, this fallacy is well used otherwise the law and order system would get extremely corrupted. If the defendant was to prove his innocence then law enforcing agencies could put anyone in the trouble of proving themselves to be innocent for whatever alleged crime. It was wrong of Senator McCarthy to accuse anyone of having Communist connections or for Mahathir Mohammad to hold the former Deputy Prime Minister of Malaysia as guilty (Interview of Mahathir Mohammad) based on the fact that they have not been able to prove their innocence.

             False Dilemma.

             This is a fallacy that is also known as a black or white fallacy where a choice is given to be made between two extremes of a spectrum rather than acknowledging that an intermediate state could also be present. It's more like either black or white without giving the option of a grey. More like, accept either "A" to be true or "B" to be true, where both "A" and "B" could be false. Atheists use this fallacy to prove that God does not exist. Ask a Christian and he would say God is omnipotent. The Atheist would then ask if God is omnipotent can He make a wall so strong that he cannot break it. This would lead the Christian or any other theologian into a corner with no escape. .

             A classic example was seen by the speech of the President of the United States recently after the terrorist attacks on the World Trade Center. He stated that every nation has to decide "either you are with us or against us" (William Raspberry). It is not necessary that any nation who would not become an ally to the United States is naturally against the United States.