extreme as he has in other interviews. And while the interviewer certainly tried to throw emotion into it to distort or deflect attention away from facts, I thought she did a perfectly fine job and allowed him to clarify/address her issues. I would in no way consider that interview to be "fake news", and I would hope you see how that was very different than the original WaPo article that barely addressed and tried to deflect away from this being about people that have already been given orders for removal. There has been a process and a ruling of removal. All the heart string tugging, children shown crying, and couching this as "one faction's point of view" neither changes that nor provides a valid excuse for ignoring the laws and the rulings for removal.