next case on the calendar is rodriguez versus nassau county the appellant is on submission and we have miss gross for the appellee yes good morning your honour's morning hope we had better luck with you i'm glad i was just sitting to produce any supportive probative evidence which would present a genuine dispute material facts she basically now in her claims down on this appeal to gender discrimination hostile work environment that when she was interviewed for the for for the promotion to the position of his or to director that the person who interviewed her who was the chair i think of that person and major respectability for making the complaint with the state division of human rights does not mention that statement in the next year who claim that statement is not in her complaint and then the next year two thousand and seventeen she was deposed for this case and in in response to the question what evidence did do you have regarding the interviewer's gender discrimination against you she said were essential e he doesn't have to say anything about my government so she basically contradicted herself and it was only in two thousand and eighteen in her nd deposition that this statement came about so it's her own contradiction of her straight come into handy stand the argument that you're making and that when when when when a comment dismayed that directly addresses the issue you know when you're if your boss says i'm firing you because you're d czechoslovakia and that can't be a straight comment straight comments i believe being comments that have nothing to do with the issue in question which might be which might show or which do show biased on the part of the speaker or but they are to address to the issue in dispute i don't see how it can be called a straight comment for the person who's interviewing you for the job to say i don't want you because because i want somebody of a different race gender nationality as i understand your other argument much less the district courts inconsistency i was going to reason given for why yeah now it was a different attorney actually so and you know it's possible i'm who's of course hypothesizing here but it's possible at that moment she didn't even realize the inconsistency and if there was that answer directly answer to be earlier question it's certainly dull and this is a woman who specialized in discovering and she was a lawyer the fact that she didn't bring it out in her complaints of the state division of human rights or her complaint also you know seems if you're going to find one thing inconsistent it would be she was consistent for three years in iraq and then in the last eleven hour basically came up in twenty think it it's barely interpreted that way your honor i think that that statement means he wants to hire more diverse people and other people i'm not necessarily for the executive director position he's talking about hiring people in the commission she was interviewing for an executive director position at that time and he did she did not say he said he wanted a man for the executive director so your point is that he may have been just speaking generally a bad about hir know having greater diversity or i just was a comment about a bad general hiring yes about expanding their staff in the commission and bringing in different