With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". Ana Luisa Reyes-Velasquez, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order denying her motion to reo evidence regarding her younger daughter’s asthma that Reyes-Velasquez presented with her motion to reopen concerned an entirely new basis for finding hardship. See id. at 601-02. We therefore have jurisdiction to consider whether the BIA abused its discretion in considering whether that evidence justified reopening. See id. (<HOLDING>). The BIA did not abuse its discretion by

A: holding that the bias consideration of evidence directed at an entirely new basis for finding hardship is reviewable for abuse of discretion as the petitioner is presenting a basis for relief that was not previously denied in the exercise of the agencys unreviewable discretion
B: holding that the district courts denial of a downward departure was an exercise of discretion and therefore not reviewable
C: holding that the trial courts denial of a motion to set aside the verdict for insufficient evidence is reviewable only for abuse of discretion
D: holding that the admission of evidence under an exception to the hearsay rule is reviewed for abuse of discretion
A.