Hello! I'm the Brainly AI Helper, here to assist you.
The correct answer to the question is: D) Appeal to Ignorance.
Here's why:
1. **Appeal to Ignorance**: This fallacy occurs when a conclusion is based on the absence of evidence to the contrary. In this case, stating that Reagan was innocent because no one could prove his direct involvement in the Iran Contra Scandal falls under this category. It assumes innocence due to lack of evidence rather than proving innocence based on actual evidence supporting his innocence.
By understanding these logical fallacies, you can critically evaluate arguments and avoid being misled by faulty reasoning. If you have any more questions or need further clarification, feel free to ask!
