Trump admin to end separation policy

[Dill]

(06-26-2018, 04:20 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Sure the cases you provided may be examples of families separated while seeking asylum legally; must admit I glossed over them at halftime. But this has 0 to do with the topic at hand and you most likely know it; so there in lies the obfuscation. The subject at hand in about separating those that enter illegally from their parents.

You want to start a thread about legal asylum seekers being unjustly separated from their children and I'll be right there with you on the soapbox. But this is NOT what the current issue is about. I agree there's no need to take the time to show you have failed once again. Folks can take the time and read for themselves.

B-zona posted an article about a Trump order to end family separations. There are many legitimate digressions which can spin off from a topic like that, including legality, scope, media representation, and effects of the policy which are intended, unintended, and unknown.

Establishing that children are separated from parents legally applying for asylum clarifies how Trump's separation policy is playing out, an intended or unintended consequence.

OBFUSCATION is "the action of making something obscure, unclear, or unintelligible." 

You were happy to respond when you thought I could not provide legitimate examples of parents legally seeking asylum separated from children. Agreeing now that I have established examples which prove my point, you insist, nevertheless, that I have "failed once again" though you don't have time to show how.

If you can't/won't answer the question, just say so, rather than claiming a consequence of Trump's separation policy is "off topic" because you say so and needs another thread. That is simply deflection, a form of obfuscation.