you because that agency gave to cursory a look at a very serious persecution and torture claim your honors i will address the reasons given by the board for its finding of non credibility and demonstrate how none of these are supported by must consider the totality of circumstances and all relevant factors when making a credibility determination however this does not give a blank check to insulate the credibility determination from review credibility determinations are determined the immigration judges finding that mr testified in consistently in the number of days that he was interrogated a reasonable fact finder would not find an inconsistency here because no inconsistency existed vindication judge believes that one point that mr allowed testified that he was interrogated on five days and that about another time he testified that he was interrogated on all six days of detention however if we look at the pages that the board sides as well as the record in its entirety at no point does mr dallas testify that he was interrogated on only five days of testimony second your honor the board erred in adopting the immigration judges finding  immigration judge found it impossible that mr john met him in his adult life under the circumstances it is unreasonable to determine that mr dale could not have met mr jack mr james in his adult life and it is apparent when we look at the context of contacts and conditions under which mr giles learned of christianity we would understand and appreciate why it is that he does not no what christmas signifies mr learned of christianity from mr jane who was a man who does not indicate that she ever received any formalized training of the of christianity mr darwin and just christianity through the use of a bible the bible does not one state the word christmas and it does not mention non credibility were based on inadequate translation turning to the first of these board repeats the immigration judges mis understanding that mr job was non credible when he when he was that mr giles testimony was inconsistent because she thought he said in his written application he was alone when he was interrogated and she thought that he said in his all testimony that he was with others and this must understanding occurred because of inadequate translation on page eighty one of the ministry of record mr general is asked about his first interrogation and he explained that the police told him that they needed to beat all of you when we look into the surrounding context of his testimony it's evidence that mr giles was alone when he was interrogated beaded all you is a nonstandard english sentence indicative that the interpreter did not have adequate jurisdictional argument that is that we can't consider these due process issues because they were not first presented to the board your honor this issue was exhausted in mr giles brief to the board in support of appeal on page nine of the ministry irrational because of the credibility decision you read from age nine which i think we all have pretty carefully for the life of me i'm having a little trouble understanding how the i a e a would figure out you your honor we will hear from the government my name is nicole charlie and i represent the attorney general of the united states in this case out of the spell to present compelling evidence to support reversing the agency's adverse credibility determination immigration regards regarding the circumstances of his arrest and his detention including where he was arrested the type of abuse he received the numbers of days that he was interrogated whether he was separated or detained with  household registry he was non responsive related to basic questions regarding his religion which was the sole basis of his asylum claim he testified inconsistently regarding when you open this restaurant why it was a problem that he was not allowed to reopen the restaurant when you made it earlier years earlier he had closed it because he could not turn a profit he justified it consistently regarding whether he regularly regularly attended church whether he was working in the united states and i believe that sums up the full basis i'm willing to speak on and yet these in detail the panel has any questions who questions council thank you law school professor and the students who are good you're good thank you very much