he's with the asylum officer right did he tell the asylum officer i put false information to my client no he didn't say the officer did not ask him you there and also well he's the one that put forward the information  a number of the fact that he wrote down regarding my religion are not true he told me that is a better if you leave things the way they are because this gives more force more weight to my declaration i talk with some people who know him and they told me he'd help many people s decision in that regard what he did was simply state of the alien because you admitted that you lied on your asylum application i'm not going to draw inferences as to the motive or the next day between your past harm and  the phone calls that he received were anonymous the content of the calls was linked to him withdrawing an application to recover some of his family land to him quitting his particular employment at that time whether it be with the radio station or the newspaper he also talked to find that other employees at his place of business received similar phone calls were similarly threatened or similarly harmed and there's just no clear indication in this record and any reason  related to one of the five grounds under the act that they were targeting the aliens and in that regard i think it's important to look to the testimony of professor perhaps particularly at pages one zero five and through one of seven of the records where he explains that yes there is some link between these wrestlers or these insurance agents and the former communist government in bulgaria but that especially what you have is people formerly in positions of power at the time of the democratic revolution they took didn't directly corroborate motive particularly salient after friend cooperated that he had a radio show but there's no clear indication of the content and there's also no clear indication that he was targeted because of that content you know and with the aliens willingness both to lie on the application and then just sort of try to explain it away and steak well because i came clean before you now believe everything i say the immigration judge in this case didn't just stop with credibility he moved past credibility and went to a burden of proof analysis which is he could have stopped his credibility on his back and he didn't he went beyond that and looked at the totality of the evidence in the record and came to a conclusion is that he simply declined to draw inferences from the alien testimony i think that there was really no question in the immigration judges mind that the that that the alien testified to occurred he simply did not give the alien the record and i believe it's pages one thirty eight to one forty six between the immigration judge any alien in this case about his explanations and about why he included this false statement and later recanted and i think ultimately the immigration judges coming clean now that's why i kind of use the term punitive and i and i understand your argument that if he had been granted release maybe there'd have been simply stopped our credibility and said i find you not credible based on the fact that you included this false statement knowingly if you have stopped there i might agree with your characterization because he says that look you inter information or he's failed you know he failed but he presented that offer to the decision maker and he would have been the beneficiary of the decision in his favor and that an agent of the