at 73. The BIA’s finding that Dong was not credible is supported by substantial evidence. There is at least one material inconsistency between Dong’s and his wife’s account of his family’s persecution at the hands of the family planning officials. Dong testified on direct examination that he did not witness he family planning officials taking his wife from their home for a forced abortion. In a letter to the IJ, Dong’s wife stated that her husband had been home and had been beaten by the family planning officials. This inconsistency is directly related to Dong’s claim of persecution, and therefore is a “specific, cogent” reason that bears a “legitimate nexus” to the BIA’s conclusion that Dong was not credible in his description of his family’s persecution. See Zhang, 386 F.3d at 77-78 (<HOLDING>). Accordingly, Dong failed to carry his burden
holding that any alleged inconsistencies in dates that reveal nothing about a petitioners credibility cannot form the basis of an adverse credibility finding holding the bias decision upholding the ijs finding of removability  was the final order holding that ijs and bias finding of applicants lack of credibility was substantially supported by the inconsistencies regarding the date of spouses alleged sterilization holding that in light of an applicants omission of various relevant facts from his asylum application substantial evidence supported the ijs adverse credibility determination holding that the ijs or bias credibility determinations are not questioned if they are substantially reasonable