first although the immigration judge noted that mr mollett was subject to serious economic harms which mr kamali testified threatened her very economic survival immigration judge failed utterly to apply the law as articulated by this circuit to that finding second in concluding that miss molly his persecutors were not motivated to harm her because of a protected characteristic the immigration judge ignored mr malia's undisputed testimony about her own religion and political opinion as well as statements made by her persecutors expressing their intent to harm her but her of those two characteristics the i j a further ignored this court's repeated proceeding is your argument that it was actually her religion that motivated the economic harm that was there were two motives your honor two principle motives although she also indicated that her gender was  a source of problems prinz the police it was her political opinion and her religion in two thousand and one is gone molly a converted to the evangelical church and as she noted after  after that conversion the problems which she was experiencing with the romanian authorities increased quote as if gas had been poured on a fire she also made her opposition to  ruling party publicly clear and she notes that in page one sixty nine of the record mr mani explicitly told the romanian officials that she did not join the party because she did not agree with their policies and practices  spite of this the members of the romanian government pressured her almost daily to become a member of the ruling party and this was in part as she testified because as a business owner she was expected to ensure that her employers would give them that as an employer she would be able to provide the ruling party with the votes of her employees that will help me understand how the law works with respect to the facts as to her political opinion it sounds as though she just wants to stay out of politics leave me alone and party keeps pressuring her joint and she says i don't want to be cause i'm not a political person i was want to run my business the way are i ought to that i think that's a  plausible character characterization of her testimony is that is that a protective ground when she says listen just leave me alone i don't want to be a member of your party your own political neutrality can be a political opinion for the purposes of asylum law but i think actually your characterization parallels the immigration judges characterization but i don't think that's really supported by mr malia's testimony in which she explicitly stated that she did not agree with the p d s are its policies she was very clear about her opposition to the way that they were doing business and the way in which they were essentially running the romanian government ok we have she's suffering is attributable to just ordinary corruption that exists in romania sounds as though anybody running a business even a member the party has to make payments and lose various things that's not part of the corruption i think that was be to refer to miss amalia's testimony in which she compared the harms that she suffered with the harm suffered by other business owners she said yes everyone was expected to pay bribes but the degree to which they were other business owners were extorted was very small compared to the degree to which mr mollett was targeted it appeared sixty six sixty four of the record she noted that other business owners who supported the ruling party were expected to pay much smaller sums they were also encouraged to do business on the black market to earn additional money encouraged by the romanian government that is and they were quote almost guaranteed easy access to government protection and benefit  one ninety of the record and i think most significantly other business owners are not subject to the type of economic sanctions which mr mollett was subjected to for example she was deprived of an entire year's proceeds from her longer risky any proceeds from that business even though he was still a part owner and had initially own more than ninety nine percent of that business so effectively he was forced to relinquish the entirety of his business to two p d s r officials immediately following his decision to refuse to continue to pay them bribes so i think what's clear from those instances is that the type of harms economic harm specifically miss molly was subjected aspect of the case is there anyone from this record that we can tell whether your clients were singled out by virtue of their politics or religion or is this just part of the general corruption that charges are trumped up against you and then angel comes along who for a very steep price will make that problem go away and now you suddenly have unwanted business i completely understand your honour's concern and that's but i think that by looking to the statements of the romanian authorities is where we can really see what was motivating them  was expressly told that that she was threatened quote almost daily that it would be to her own good if she were a member of the party when she objected to the government's extortion she was told quote this is a page one sixty three of the record if you don't want to join the party you will have to suffer i just generally page forty four it's noted that mr molly his mother was told that miss kamali had offended the party and would have to the evidence of all these persecution there was a statement that they refused to respond that is happening here in the united states we have a policy in las vegas now for the please don't respond to auto theft i've had personal experience if they don't respond to complaints or vandalism they'll take a reported week or two later but they don't send out people anymore so that's that's not take is clearly at the i j a i believe the testimony her testimony is very clear that while there is bribery throughout the society she was forced to pay substantially more because of her indication although she doesn't attach you know she doesn't say twenty five dollars but she says the others were required to the party members and so on they were acquired display small amounts but i by contrast was forced to give the money and the profit for an entire year from my sho we're common ground at least at least until we can be that we are on common ground let's assume and i'm making these numbers up these are not numbers in the record let's just say that all party members are required to pay a dollar a year and can corrupt sort of extortion whereas people who are evangelicals are not members of the party are required because they're evangelicals and not members of the party are required to pay one hundred million dollars a year ok would that be persecution  she was that her testimony is that she was asked to pay these additional amounts because of her religion and because of her refusal to join the party that's what she testified to oh yes that is what you testified to but the immigration judge found that she was like i said that the fact that everybody had to pay from you know this is a usual occurrence in romania that they have to pay bribes and it's just a part of doing business in the country but i don't think you're engaging with our questions our questions are what if she has to pay more hell no discrimination based on a protected ground year and not enough that her husband has effectively lost any ownership or control over his business well there's no evidence to show that he didn't actually owe the loans you know in that case and that you know the judgment wasn't justified i mean he still retained thirty percent of his business is his choice to leave romania and he says that he can you know go to court an international court and tr put out of business completely deprived i have in mind a case where the israeli marine shot up the fishing boat yes is that the problem i mean that's pretty severe it is your position here that ok maybe she had to pay pretty steep bribes but she was still able to continue in business and still able to earn a living yes she was able to earn a living and still continue he and baba and he he trained to become an record to show that they are trying to end this corruption armenia so now she has  never been required by this court in fact that requirement has been expressly rejected mr kamali however has clearly stated that her very economic survival was threatened by these almost daily demands for extortion the deprivation who also stole merchandise from her store and she was forced to pay these exorbitant sounds which we've already discussed whereas government misread i was compelled to quit her job of ten years government officials threatened to shut m