Talk:Bill Browder

The Bill Browder article states: "Continuing a family tradition, Bill Browder is the sworn enemy of the global anti-communist movement, exemplified by Browder's rift with Vladimir Putin."

First of all, there is no supporting footnote for this big claim. So I am rightly skeptical.

And secondly, at first appearance, he comes across as more of a businessman who likes to avoid taxes - either legally or illegally. He doesn't come across as a communist. Conservative (talk) 16:20, September 8, 2023 (EDT)

Oh, fine. He's only the grandson of CPUSA General Secretary Earl Browder, the man FDR, like Biden and Putin, threw in in prison cause he was running against him in a presidential election. RobS^{Give Peace a Chance!} 16:23, September 8, 2023 (EDT)

That's not proof. There are plenty of sons who did not follow the footsteps of their fathers. It's the logical fallacy of guilt by association.

"The son will not bear the punishment for the sin of the father, nor will the father bear the punishment for the sin of the son; the righteousness of the righteous shall be on himself, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be on himself." - Ezekiel 18:19-23 Amplified Bible (AMP) Conservative (talk) 16:27, September 8, 2023 (EDT)

(ec) Look, if you want an education in geopolitics or history, you either have to get it on your own or stop trolling me. RobS^{Give Peace a Chance!} 16:28, September 8, 2023 (EDT)

Conservapedia articles are expected to be factual. And those facts need to have a supporting citation or citations. It's right in the Conservapedia Commandments.

If your claim is a fact, it should be easy for you to support it with a citation. Conservative (talk) 16:31, September 8, 2023 (EDT)

Conservapedia Commandment #1: "Everything you post must be true and verifiable."

I asked for verification through a citation or citations, which is more than reasonable, but you failed to provide a citation or citations. Conservative (talk)

Then put the Template:Fact ^{[Citation Needed]} up, duh. And you're an Admin?

Why are you arguing with another Admin over something as stupid as this? RobS^{Give Peace a Chance!} 16:38, September 8, 2023 (EDT)

By the way, Conservative, I see that RobSmith locked your mail page to "Administrators only." Just thought I should tell you. —LT ^{Rev. 22:13} Friday, 16:45, September 8, 2023 (EDT)

I very politely asked Rob to support his claim. And then he admitted it was guilt by association and it had no factual support. Case closed. Conservative (talk) 16:49, September 8, 2023 (EDT)

I put the fact template in the Bill Browder article as per your request. If you don't provide a citation that supports your claim, I will free to remove RobSmith's unsupported claim from the Bill Browder article. Hopefully, he removes the unsupported claim on his own though. Conservative (talk) 19:25, September 8, 2023 (EDT)

Much of the contents of this page was written with research provided by Jeff Carlson prior to his hiring by the Epoch Times. RobS^{Give Peace a Chance!} 19:53, September 8, 2023 (EDT)

At the time, I was in contact with Carlson regarding research on James Comey's April 2016 all day White House visit. RobS^{Give Peace a Chance!} 19:55, September 8, 2023 (EDT)

In all due respect, that is not evidence of your specific claim RobSmith. Conservative (talk) 20:01, September 8, 2023 (EDT)

You're just spam trolling again. Let Andy read the entire article and render a decision. RobS^{Give Peace a Chance!} 20:09, September 8, 2023 (EDT)

RobSmith, Conservapedia commandment #1: Everything must be true and verifiable.

You can't just willy nilly claim that you have a confidential source. Andy is a big believer in verifiability. That is why he asked Richard Lenski for his data.

And this is a key point: You already told us the reason you put this unsupported claim in the article. You did it because his grandaddy was a staunch communist. Now you want to change your story and claim it was due to a confidential source. Well, LT and I have already caught you in blatent lying in the past regarding false claims. Specifically, I caught you making up things out of thin air and claiming that sources corporately claimed something they definitely did not claim (See: Talk:Karen Dawisha).Conservative (talk) 20:44, September 8, 2023 (EDT)

The most recent update: This is another example of this editor trying to make a source claim something it doesn't say

User: RobSmith your revision now says:

"Continuing a family tradition, Bill Browder is the red diaper baby nemesis of Vladimir Putin. Modern Russia is determined that the atheistic communist ideology will never dominate Russia again."

User: RobSmtith, your own source says: "But by odd coincidence, Earl Browder’s grandson Bill, a Red diaper baby turned capitalist"."[1] (bolding added for emphasis).

Notice that your source indicates he is capitalist, not a communist.

User: RobSmith, find a reputable conservative or right-wing source saying Bill Browder is communist. So far you haven't provided any source indicating that Bill Browder is a communist.

This is not a reasonable approach. Conservative (talk) 21:20, September 8, 2023 (EDT)