Li

facts establish a claim for asylum that should have been impervious to inconsistencies not at its heart. See Singh v. Ashcroft, 301 F.3d 1109, 1111 (9th Cir. 2002).

Li has every reason to fear officially-sanctioned persecu- tion if returned to China. Following the birth of his second and third children, Li was fined substantially and his wife was sterilized. But the merits of this compelling case were never reached because Li was judged to lack credibility. Judge Noo- nan cogently describes the thin veneer underlying that deter- mination:

[B]ased on misinterpreting Li’s candid testimony about hiding in China, exaggerating the significance of his memory of the fines; chastising him for not embroidering what he suffered as officials enforced the official population policy, guessing that his wife’s sterilization was voluntary, and marveling at his non-assertions of a basis for asylum at times when it could not have been legally effective, the IJ found Li incredible on the issue of past persecution.

378 F.3d at 967 (Noonan, J. dissenting). 1 Li v. Ashcroft, 378 F.3d 959, 964-68 (9th Cir. 2004) (Noonan, J., dis- senting). LI v. ASHCROFT 1313 That the IJ got…