This is a Soviet myth

you mongoloid.

lol; if you say so

Lenin wasn't the cuck he was the one who did the cucking do you not know what a cuck is?

this is an equivilent to "you up?"


https://trove.nla.gov.au/newspaper/article/50938504

the notion that royalty would EVER keep 'evidence' of an affair... what would do you live it, incel?

Tsarina to rasputin at 3am letter


"u up? bae isnt home"

@BabaBooey If you want to play the team game and make it necessary to play on a team, *people will gladly choose the other side.*

**Whether that be the legitimate democratically elected consensus pacifying you or the Brownshirts eliminating you. *As long as you are not a threat anymore.***

when you fuck a man's wife, especially one with power, you go to great LENGTHS to insure there IS no evidence to be found

>Newspaper Article

>Not actually the letters

Baba you abject retard.

But how do we disprove a negative, then?

This is dated 1917.

And it's in an American newspaper

These aren't the translated letters

you cannot disprove a negative

This is Soviet Propaganda.

Exactly!

<:pepelaugh:544857300179877898>

So should we agree to vile rumours that cannot be proven, then?

If it were dated like 1910 or something

I'd be impressed

however, a widely accepted historical narrative has the effect of SHIFTING the burden of proof

You know what can be proven? That baba is a natzee

Everyone here agrees on that

But there is no widely accepted evidence that the Tsarina screwed Rasputin.

Stop slandering a Saint.

Communist filth.

as will the moon landing for example, it requires extraordinary evidence to CONVINCE people to re-examine what is accepted as 'fact'

Fascism is just better communism, change my mind.

after all, 'fact' isn't 'truth' ; it is consensus of what actually occured

She is a beautiful wife and mother who faced her death with Christian dignity.

@ManAnimal That may be how people act, but the burden of proof is still on them. The consensus is not always right.

negative

May she ever pray for your sad soul, Baba.

it's not legally either

it is a special case, such as will the concept of 'negligence'

the fact that something is a widely accepted truth acts as a 'pre-existing duty' in which the burden of proof shifts to the person trying to prove they were NOT guilty of neglgence

**Most noble and sublime was your life and death, O Sovereigns;
Wise Nicholas and blest Alexandra, we praise you,
Acclaiming your piety, meekness, faith, and humility,
Whereby ye attained to crowns of glory in Christ our God,
With your five renowned and godly children of blessed fame.
O passion–bearers decked in purple, intercede for us.**