Sorry, but the burden of proof belongs 100%, no 1,000%, to you jeffersondem.
You must prove your ludicrous allegations beyond a reasonable doubt, by providing irrefutable evidence proving they actually happened.
In the example of this Sherman to Grant letter, you have no proof Grant accepted Sherman's request and strong evidence he did not, namely the US lost that war.
Of course, providing proof should be quite easy for you, if there was a case brought successfully against Sherman for "mass murder", "extermination", "genocide" or other such crimes.
Just provide us a brief summary and the link.
Case closed, right?
“In the example of this Sherman to Grant letter, you have no proof Grant accepted Sherman’s request and strong evidence he did not, namely the US lost that war.”
When you speak of the “Sherman to Grant letter” you are referring to when Sherman famously said to Grant: “We must act with vindictive earnestness against the Sioux, even to their extermination, men, women and children.”
And you say “the US lost that war” is “strong evidence” Grant did not accept Sherman’s extermination recommendation. In fact, this “strong evidence” is the only evidence you cite.
If, as you contend, the US lost this war because Grant stopped Sherman’s vital extermination plan then we must ask how the US won subsequent Indian wars?
Or is it your contention all subsequent Indian wars were lost by the US?