Then stop practicing it. You've been shown nine ways to Sunday that your belief on the "neither...nor" phrase is wrong. I've just given you yet another detailed schooling on it. If you disagree, then you need to give a specific reason why based on actual logic and not baseless attempts to smear.
Very simple. Removing the “neither... nor” reversed the meaning of the quote you posted.
I honestly admitted an error in which part of the Judicial system made a statement (which didn’t change the basic fact that the government said the child was not deported).
You won’t admit
1. That the children in the cases posted are not deported, they accompany their parents.
2. That omitting the first part of the quote changes the meaning.
You keep trying to weasel out of your slicing up the quote, but you can’t. No matter what you say about the rest of the case (and I’ve shown you are incorrect there, as well) you presented a truncated quote to claim a meaning opposite to what the quote actually said. It could have been sloppy reasearch - if you acknowledged it, I’d let it go. But you continue to defend it.
1. The teacher and the principal said that John cheated on the test.
2. Neither the teacher nor the principal said that John cheated on the test.
See the difference?