With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". credible is supported by substantial evidence, as there were material inconsistencies between Pan’s asylum interview and his subsequent testimony before the IJ. These inconsistencies included Pan’s admission that he lied to an asylum officer concerning being threatened with and escaping sterilization. Furthermore, during the same interview in 1996, while claiming that he had been threatened with sterilization, he made no mention of his wife’s involuntary sterilization in 1992. As these inconsistencies are borne out by the record and relate to an integral part of Pan’s persecution claim, they constitute “specific, cogent” reasons that bear a “legitimate nexus” to the BIA’s conclusion that Pan was not credible in his description of his wife’s sterilization. See Zhang, 386 F.3d at 77-78 (<HOLDING>). Accordingly, Pan failed to carry his burden

A: holding that ijs and bias finding of applicants lack of credibility was substantially supported by the inconsistencies regarding the date of spouses alleged sterilization
B: holding the bias decision upholding the ijs finding of removability  was the final order
C: holding that any alleged inconsistencies in dates that reveal nothing about a petitioners credibility cannot form the basis of an adverse credibility finding
D: holding that in light of an applicants omission of various relevant facts from his asylum application substantial evidence supported the ijs adverse credibility determination
A.