ercion, in our view, requires a threat of adverse action connected to a specific instruction such that it is a, if you don't do we will do y to u. that is not in the record and murphy. it is in the record here with respect to the lloyd's meeting a paicar. >> does that mean that the new york officials could have achieved wh ey wanted to achieve if they had not done in such a m-handed manner? so instead of having the meeting with lloyd's , they just gave eeches about guns and how bad the nra is, and they spoke about social backlash againsgu and those who advocate for gun rights in the wake of the terrible pa when shooting. but in all of that the don't mention anything about regulatory authority. and then, after harping on that, they ke general statements about the importance of er insurance company taking into account reputational risk, and then they sit back and see whether that achieves the desired result. basicay,that is what your position is, isn't it? >> no, your honor. if wh ey did was what i outline, wiouthe violation of bantam books? >> probably no cause they would be an attenuat