do with the extraordinary difference between well at least said at the dockside interview and what he said later in several rather important respects one he didn't indicate that he was married or had a common law wife and the son he said he left china because he couldn't find a job he said he was coming to the united states of allowances for strike for that plus they are quite extraordinary way in which you manage to venture from china to here he's got of been pretty tired when he got off the boat but that aside those are really fairly major fairly easy questions to answer that's right john they were answered without apparent difficulty yes or no first of all regarding the excessive compared to be earlier for discussion about i think it was five hundred r and b or two hundred r and b it was there any evidence introduced anything anything on the record that you can point to that shows so immigration judge does that and under our raj you know we are substantial evidence and according to the sink case we're only supposed to be rushed if the evidence compelled to say contrary conclusion perspective on the demeanor of the witness and so on how can you share this if she's obviously made some findings that just some degree were her impression based perhaps on facial expressions body language whatever which we china that's right the most of the morning when one is the common law wife first there with the show her age because the third document that was the matter was the child's birth certificate and that indicated that wife the mother was eighteen your song at a time you don't have me well but the bottom line here is that of all of a zillion reasons that the immigration judge gave me for making an adverse credibility determination almost all if not all are in adequate under existing ninth circuit precedent whether one likes the president or not that's the reality most of the findings are out the window so can can you explain in forty five words or less why mr cain is not correct that the record evidence does in fact compel claims persecution honestly how the fact that his girlfriend had a baby i'm aware of that your are not married that subjected him and her like him to a humongous fine that he credibility it's interesting to note that one and hearing he did not make any claim when he once  his attorney present by phone and it's very interesting that even if the argument is true without any supporting evidence that he might have had some a lot of confusion or whatever at dockside he says the same thing almost two weeks later he can't decide whether or not the child was born before or after he left he makes no claim to being married but in the ground that i take that right i'm sorry abortion once the child has been born that out the worry about that anymore and the fact that they had to go to the hospital the authorities obviously know about it why does that constitute a substantial ground for lack of credibility well the i j a just didn't find it persuasive understand that but yeah i did as an obligation to list substantive pieces of evidence upon which her findings can be based and at least on that one i for one i don't understand that one because there is a clear difference before the baby is born well after the baby is born first to admit that it can be seen many ways understand but cheat the government has the burden initially here once we get up to the court of appeal then the mr levy has some obligation to show why the a i j did not have substantial ground but the other two the ground is crumbling out from under the government's case and that's what i'm trying to understand where the government's case rests at that point on that i was going your honor to the other two reasons that we thought were better than the rest and that was the discrepancy between what was said before the hearing  under pressure which mr lee clearly was one of the substantive differences between the dockside interview and the i j a hearing that you believe for substantial enough that the i j a could have founded her opinion on those differences like the first one is that not until the hearing if you claim at least some of the time that this woman was this  ask why do you consider her your wife isn't the answer was because my mother and father agree that's what he said or maybe under chinese culture there's nothing wrong with that but it's interesting that he that they don't have a chance to start having foreseen a situation like this where you know they view themselves as trying i can only say i've never seen a case of population control case from china where the couple if they said they were married didn't marry traditionally in the village and i haven't seen acacia that really pleasures out that's it's i've never heard one where they said because mommy and daddy agree with me dog that's all you have here he never you never claimed he never uses the word dog we know at least i've never seen a case where the registration was marriage in some cases registration is permission to marry if they go first and in other cases after the fact when it's a recognition because you're letting us know she was country and benefits commer don't come from a marriage relationship for the children most especially they can't go to school perhaps if they're not if you want to marry couple