Read the following excerpt from a US court opinion:
```
by, a protected ground.”); see also § 1252(b)(4)(B). The crux of Thuri’s position is that she was persecuted because her father opposed institutional government corruption — which (in her view) constitutes the expression of a political opinion. By contrast, the IJ concluded, and the government contends, that the officers’ retaliatory conduct was driven by a criminal, nonpolitical motive to punish Thuri’s father for reporting the hijacking. Thuri has not identified any decisions in this circuit that support her argument for refugee status. In addition, even if the two Ninth Circuit cases on which Thuri relies were binding precedent, it is not clear that the legal standards those decisions announce would apply to Thuri’s case. See Grava v. INS, 205 F.3d 1177, 1181 & n. 3 (9th Cir.2000) ; Desir v. Ilchert, 840 F.2d 723, 727-29 (9th
```
What is the most suitable continuation to the opinion? Your options are:
A. recognizing that purely personal retribution is of course not persecution on account of political opinion but holding that when the alleged government corruption is inextricably intertwined with governmental operation the exposure and prosecution of such an abuse of public trust is necessarily political
B. holding that opposition to government corruption may constitute political opinion
C. holding that retaliation for opposition to government corruption can constitute persecution on account of a political opinion
D. holding that persecution was on account of political opinion because petitioners prosecutorial investigation into acts of political corruption was by its very nature political
E. holding that a fear of retribution from a husband a high political official was a strictly personal matter
Reply with [A, B, C, D, E] only.