With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". Twum v. INS, 411 F.3d 54, 58 (2d Cir.2005); Secaida-Rosales v. INS, 331 F.3d 297, 305-07 (2d Cir.2003). In Diallo v. INS, 232 F.3d 279 (2d Cir. 2000), we explained that an IJ is required to make an explicit credibility determination that includes an examination of the effect of the applicant’s corroborating documents on his credibility. As explained in Diallo, “[i]n making their [credibility] determinations, the IJ and the BIA should consider the underlying consistency and plausibility of [the applicant’s] story, the extent to which it was corroborated, and the believability of the explanations [the applicant] offered for fading to provide further corroboration.” Diallo, 232 F.3d at 290. An alien’s testimony, if credible, may be sufficient to sustain his burden of proof. See id. at 285 (<HOLDING>). Nevertheless, where the circumstances suggest

A: recognizing that consistent detailed and credible testimony may be sufficient to carry the aliens burden
B: recognizing burden
C: holding that committee failed to carry its ultimate burden
D: holding that where the ij finds the petitioner to be credible his testimony must be accepted
A.