With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". F.3d 307, 313 (2d Cir.1999) (finding that an asylum applicant’s claim of a well-founded fear of persecution was diminished because the applicant’s mother and daughters continued to live in her native country unharmed). Contrary to Vukaj’s arguments, the fact his brothers were younger than he is, or that his father received threats after Vukaj left the country, does not establish that the IJ erred in drawing inferences from the fact that Vukaj’s brothers and father remain unharmed. Additionally, the record supports the agency’s conclusion that while political violence against supporters of the Democratic Party has not completely disappeared, it has been reduced since the Democratic Party came to power in 2005. See Hoxhallari v. Gonzales, 468 F.3d 179, 185-87 (2d Cir.2006) (per curiam) (<HOLDING>). The agency was not compelled to accept

A: holding the findings of fact required to support an alimony award are sufficient if findings of fact have been made on the ultimate facts at issue in the case and the findings of fact show the trial court properly applied the law in the case
B: holding because defendant does not argue in his brief that these findings of fact are not supported by    evidence in the record this court is bound by the trial courts findings of fact
C: holding that when making findings that country conditions have changed in a country like albania which is subject to a large proportion of asylum claims the agency need not enter specific findings premised on record evidence
D: holding that a reviewing court has the power to reject the findings and conclusions of the trial court where the findings are not supported by the evidence
C.