For the backstory on the Meng Wanzhou arrest, so you know the shot, please click here. The Canadian Press: TDC_ARTICLE_START VANCOUVER — An RCMP officer who oversaw a small team based at Vancouver’s airport says he dismissed a suggestion the night before Meng Wanzhou’s flight landed to arrest the Huawei executive by boarding her plane. Sgt. Ross Lundie says he had concerns about the suggestion “right off the bat” when the officers tasked with executing the arrest raised it on Nov. 30, 2018. Lundie testified in B.C. Supreme Court that he told the Mounties boarding a plane for an arrest was “not something we do” unless there is an immediate public safety concern, and that the Canada Border Services Agency needed to be included in the discussion. TDC_ARTICLE_STOP I've included this little piece from the Canadian Press, to show the casually stated utter absurdity of them needing to border the plane in order to, *check notes, arrest this middle aged Asian lady. Let that set the tone for the rest of this extremely long article. If you just want the TL:DR, skip ahead all the way to the bottom of the page. CTV: TDC_ARTICLE_START Instead, as she stood up from her business class seat onboard the Cathay Pacific 777, and stepped into the glass jetway, she was approached by two Canada Border Services Agency (CBSA) officers. One of them checked her Hong Kong passport to confirm her identity, then asked for her phones: one white iPhone 7 Plus, and one red Huawei 20 RS Porsche Design, which Meng handed over to him. The other officer placed the phones in mylar bags provided by the RCMP, who had made the request to the CBSA on behalf of the FBI, then put them in his cargo pants pocket. Three RCMP officers stood watching out of view nearby. Border officers examine Meng for nearly three hours The CBSA officers escorted Meng to the main international arrivals hall, where a kiosk spit out a receipt directing the executive to what's known as "secondary inspection." The officers, along with a supervisor, searched Meng's luggage, and questioned her on-and-off for two hours and 36 minutes, as part of what they called a routine admissibility exam. Those officers have since testified they had concerns related to national security and serious criminality. TDC_ARTICLE_STOP Don't you see you stupid goy? The officers simultaneously had serious national security concerns, but also just wanted to bring her in for a routine admissibility check, but also already had an outstanding warrant for her arrest. See, it all makes sense! TDC_ARTICLE_START Meng's lawyers allege that the RCMP and CBSA co-ordinated and conspired with U.S. authorities to delay her arrest in order to extract evidence that could help the U.S. prove its case. Her defence team alleges the actions taken by the RCMP and CBSA, both of whom Meng is also suing, violated her rights under the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. They argue that the violations amount to an "abuse of process" of Canadian justice so grave, that the extradition case against her, currently being heard in B.C. Supreme Court, should be halted. ... For the very first time, the RCMP and CBSA officers who came into contact with Meng Wanzhou that day, along with their supervisors, have told their version of how the encounter unfolded. Meng's defence team plans to use any gaps, doubts, and discrepancies from the witness testimony as they make their abuse of process arguments before Associate Chief Justice Heather Holmes in early 2021. They also plan to make arguments that Meng is a political pawn in a trade war between Beijing and Washington, and that the U.S. cherry-picked evidence, while excluding potentially exculpatory facts, in order to mislead Canadian courts. TDC_ARTICLE_STOP This is undoubtably true, if merely part of the picture. I can't comment as to whether Meng will win this case, since the entire operation is clearly political. If they really want to get this result, they'll get the result that they would like. More interesting than my legal predictions, are the quotes from RCMP officers yesterday. Her trial has progressed to the point where they were taking the stand, and what they said is extremely spicy. TDC_ARTICLE_START Const. Yep, who worked for an RCMP unit at B.C. headquarters that handles requests from outside jurisdictions, testified he first learned about the U.S. extradition request the afternoon before Meng arrived. He swore an affidavit in order to obtain a Provisional Arrest Warrant, which said Meng appeared to have no ties to Canada. Yep later learned Meng had two homes in Vancouver, but admitted in his testimony he never made any effort to correct the affidavit. TDC_ARTICLE_STOP So the RCMP pretended that Wanzhou had no reason to be in Canada, despite her literally owning two houses in the very same city that she flew to. Then realized they were lying and just said "fuck it, whatever." TDC_ARTICLE_START The evening of Nov. 30, Yep testified, he and a colleague, Const. Gurvinder Dhaliwal met with CBSA personnel at YVR. Yep testified that the purpose of the meeting was to confirm if Meng was on the flight from Hong Kong, not to discuss the plan for the arrest. That evening, he testified, he became aware an RCMP higher-up had suggested Yep arrest Meng onboard the plane. "It was just a suggestion," Yep testified. TDC_ARTICLE_STOP Utterly thuggish behaviour, with zero practical reason, other than to be thuggish and send a message to the Chinese Government. Again, Wanzhou is a middle aged Asian lady, not Seal Team Six. TDC_ARTICLE_START On the morning of Dec. 1, Yep, Dhaliwal and other Mounties joined members of the CBSA at YVR in a meeting in a supervisors' office. Yep testified he had "safety concerns" about arresting Meng on the plane. Defence lawyer Richard Peck pushed back and suggested Yep was lying: "My view is that is not an honest answer. Safety was never an issue," Peck alleged. Yep disputed Peck's allegation, in part, by responding that safety, when it comes to arrests, is always an issue. During the morning meeting, Yep testified, it was decided CBSA would meet Meng at the plane. Two CBSA officers would conduct an admissibility exam for immigration and customs purposes in the secondary inspection area, before handing Meng over to the RCMP who would arrest her. Yep testified that Mounties asked CBSA officers to take Meng's phones and place them in mylar bags so they couldn't be remotely wiped, at the request of the FBI. TDC_ARTICLE_STOP This literally just makes no sense at all, and is obvious bullshit. There is no reason to conduct an "admissibility check," if you already know you are going to be arresting someone and putting them in jail. In reality, as is obvious to everyone, this was just an attempt to extract more information from Wanzhou, without a lawyer present, hoping she would make some mistake. And as for "safety is always a concern with arrests," that's so stupid as to be baffling. Again, Wanzhou is not an entire gang of criminals, she's an unarmed middle aged Asian Woman. TDC_ARTICLE_START Yep also said he never asked CBSA officers, nor could he recall any fellow RCMP member asking the CBSA, to obtain any information from Meng during their exam. During the CBSA exam, Dhaliwal testified he was charged with making regular updates to his unit as well as to a Canada Department of Justice lawyer. Dhaliwal testified that he did not direct the CBSA in its exam or pose any suggestions about what questions its officers should ask. TDC_ARTICLE_STOP Even if true this would be irrelevant, since we will find out later that the CBSA made a "whoopsie," and illegally gave the RCMP Wanzhou's phone and phone passcode. There was obvious collusion, but if you're wondering why they're going to all these lengths, Wanzhou's defense is trying to prove a conspiracy between the CBSA and the RCMP. If such a conspiracy could be proven, especially if information was shared, that would be a violation of Wanzhou's rights. Now, this obviously happened, but it's not what you know, it's what you can prove in court. TDC_ARTICLE_START After Yep arrested Meng, Dhaliwal took custody of Meng's two phones, laptop, tablet, and a USB flash drive. He testified that CBSA Officer Scott Kirkland also handed him a loose sheet of paper with the passcodes for Meng's phones. Dhaliwal testified he "didn't even think about it" and just put the paper with the phones. He said at no point did he or any RCMP member ask CBSA to obtain Meng's passcodes. TDC_ARTICLE_STOP Wow, looks like there wasn't any collusion between the RCMP and the CBSA. What a crazy conspiracy theorist you would need to be to even suggest such a ridiculous thing! Instead, they just give each other confiscated property and phone passcodes for no reason, without thinking. It's a miracle that these silly-billies manage to get anything done! I mean, as long as they didn't ASK the CBSA for the phone passcodes it's totally okay if the CBSA agent gives them to them. TDC_ARTICLE_START RCMP Constable Janice Vander Graaf's notes show she arrived late to the meeting with CBSA. By the time she joined, she testified, the decision for CBSA to conduct its admissibility exam first, had already been made. Defence lawyer Scott Fenton asked if she expressed concerns, or called her boss to make him aware of the change in plan. Vander Graaf testified she did not object and did not think she called her supervisor. She also told Fenton that she had safety concerns about arresting Meng on the plane. When Fenton accused her of "making this up into a much bigger thing (than it was)," Vander Graaf denied the accusation, and testified her concerns surrounding safety were genuine. TDC_ARTICLE_STOP Holy shit guys, a single 50 year old Asian Lady is on a plane. This requires a high tech, heavily armed team of police officers. If we don't have at least 20 guys with pistols here this girl could just go absolutely crazy and dig her nails into me or something. It would be awful. TDC_ARTICLE_START In revealing testimony that verged on combative, Vander Graaf also admitted she didn't read the arrest warrant, which called for Meng's "immediate arrest," until 15 or 20 minutes before the flight landed from Hong Kong. Fenton pointedly suggested that because she hadn't read the warrant, Vander Graaf never took what he called a "commandment for immediate arrest" into consideration. Vander Graaf also testified she did not know how long CBSA's exam of Meng would take because it was "their process." When Fenton asked her if, hypothetically, the CBSA exam had taken two days, if the RCMP arrest would still be considered "immediate," she replied: "That could be, yes." Defence also established that there had been some sort of "chit-chat" between CBSA and RCMP during the exam because Vander Graaf had written in her notes at the time Meng was carrying household goods, and the only place that detail could have come from, defence pointed out, was the CBSA. TDC_ARTICLE_STOP It's like this thing is bad from so many different angles that they try to overwhelm the filthy peasants trying to logically make sense of all this. Yes, there was obvious collusion between the RCMP and the CBSA, that they are now laughably trying to deny. However, the fact that the RCMP officers didn't even read the arrest warrant until AFTER expressing serious security concerns shows that this was a political arrest. Really the arrest equivalent of a show trial. A show arrest. TDC_ARTICLE_START When it came to Meng's phones and the paper with her passcodes, Vander Graaf testified she told Dhaliwal to log them, because "he couldn't unseize something that he'd already seized," and that giving them back to Meng would be "less transparent." TDC_ARTICLE_STOP It's like this is so intentionally baffling that it's overpowering my brain. What that Constable said makes absolutely no sense at all. Don't even try to understand how giving someone back illegally siezed equipment would be "less transparent," than keeping it. Don't try, it's a complete and utter non-sequitur, designed only to confuse you. Alright, I'm going to now make these even briefer, in order to double down and prove the basic assertions relevant for each RCMP testimony. TDC_ARTICLE_START Sgt. Ross Lundie appears to have been one of the first Mounties aware that something unusual was about to transpire. As a supervisor for YVR office of the Richmond RCMP detachment, he testified he got a call from a colleague in Ottawa a week before Meng’s arrival. Lundie said the colleague asked questions about the “flow” of arriving international travelers at YVR, and whether a traveller could exit the airport without encountering a CBSA officer. ... That evening, Lundie testified, he exchanged emails with higher-ups about Meng, telling some of them to “Google the name,” realizing she was “extremely high profile.” On Dec. 1, Lundie woke up to emails from FBI legal attaché Sherri Onks, who he had previously met, and who asked him to keep her posted on Meng’s arrest. Lundie testified the request seemed “reasonable” but also that he was not the lead on the case, instead indicating the RCMP’s Foreign Domestic Liaison Unit under Sgt. Janice Vander Graaf. TDC_ARTICLE_STOP Sgt. Ross Lundie's testimony shows what everybody already knew, that Meng Wanzhou is a political prisoner, that she was ambushed by the RCMP purely for political reasons. He never outright says this, but only an idiot wouldn't believe that. TDC_ARTICLE_START Retired Staff Sgt. Ben Chang is the only witness in the Meng case to date who has declined to testify. Defence accuses Chang of illegally providing identifying information about Meng's electronic devices to the FBI, details they allege may have allowed U.S. investigators to access Meng's phone records and text messages. In an affidavit, Chang writes he was never specifically asked for the unique identifying numbers to Meng's devices from anyone at the FBI. Moreover, he writes, the information was never shared. His affidavit appears to be at least partially contradicted by an email from Chang to Dhaliwal that indicated the FBI legal attaché had requested "descriptions and lists of the devices" including the serial numbers. Chang maintains in his affidavit that he asked Dhaliwal to gather only "basic information" about Meng's devices, along with photos, because he believed U.S. authorities would need it to make a formal request for the devices through a process known as the Mutual Legal Assistance Treaty (MLAT). TDC_ARTICLE_STOP It's hilarious how full of shit these people are. This Chang guy claims that he never shared any information with the FBI. Only, he ordered other RCMP officers to gather information, which he was preparing to give to "U.S. Authorities." So his defense is "I was planning on sharing this information illegally, but I hadn't done it yet." TDC_ARTICLE_START CBSA Officer Katragadda was the least experienced member of the CBSA who dealt with Meng the day of her arrest, but also the officer who had the greatest amount of interaction with her. ... He testified he did not think the RCMP plan to arrest Meng on the plan was "appropriate" because he did not believe Meng posed an "immediate risk." ... After less than an hour, Katragadda said, he had received enough information to adjourn the exam to a later date, and because he was mindful the RCMP were waiting to arrest Meng. But when he went to his supervisors' office, where he said Mounties were waiting, one of the CBSA supervisors on duty told Katragadda to hold off until they heard back from the CBSA National Security Unit. Katragadda testified that decision was "not inappropriate" but "not what (he) had in mind." ... In the final minutes before RCMP arrested Meng, Katragadda testified that he radioed Kirkland from the CBSA supervisors' office to ask Kirkland to obtain the passcodes to Meng's two phones. Katragadda testified that while he was the one who made the request, which he called "reasonable," he could not recall whose idea it was. Less than 10 minutes later, notes and affidavits submitted by Katragadda and Kirkland show, RCMP arrested Meng. Katragadda testified he did not realize Meng's passcodes had been given to Mounties in error until "days later" at a debrief with CBSA higher-ups. TDC_ARTICLE_STOP Okay, so this clearly shows, unless one has an IQ of 70, what happened here. Katragadda clearly knew the importance of this op, but didn't quite know the shot. That Meng's passcodes were given to the CBSA literally 10 minutes before her almost 3 hour interview was up, and then "accidentally," found their way over to the RCMP, who "didn't even think about it," I mean come on. TDC_ARTICLE_START CBSA Officer Scott Kirkland, the border services officer who assisted with Meng's admissibility exam and obtained the passcodes to her phones Officer Kirkland, who has been with the CBSA since 2008, testified that he had serious concerns in the Dec. 1 morning meeting with RCMP about possible Charter issues being raised if CBSA were to examine Meng first. He also explained that, at a Port of Entry, there is a lower expectation of privacy which allows border officers to ask questions and conduct searches for immigration and customs purposes. TDC_ARTICLE_STOP Yes, for those who don't understand the importance. The RCMP can't just get Wanzhou's passcodes. The CBSA absolutely can. This is why they wanted the CBSA to interview her first, obtain her passcodes, and then "accidentally" give them to the RCMP. TDC_ARTICLE_START When it came to the passcodes to Meng's phones, Kirkland testified that he typically wrote passenger passcodes down both in his notebook and a loose sheet of paper, which he said he eventually returns to the traveller. Kirkland's testimony directly contradicted Const. Dhillon's, who testified that Kirkland handed him the sheet with Meng's passcodes. Instead, Kirkland testified he left the sheet with Meng's belongings at the counter, and when he realized he had left it behind, he went back to look for it. Kirkland testified that RCMP obtained Meng's passcodes by mistake, and he never intended, nor was he directed by anyone to provide them to Mounties. TDC_ARTICLE_STOP So at this point, it's been confirmed that either CBSA Officer Scott Kirkland is lying, or CBSA Acting Superintendent Sanjit Dhillon is lying. My money's on Dhillon, with at least 5:1 odds, since he's in a position of authority over Kirkland, who seemed to understand the potential illegality of this operation. However, they could both be lying. It's hard to say. TDC_ARTICLE_START CBSA Acting Supt. Sanjit Dhillon, one of two border services supervisors on duty in secondary inspection at YVR the day of Meng's arrest. He questioned Meng about whether Huawei does business in Iran. Supt. Dhillon testified that he "suggested" to RCMP in the Dec. 1 morning meeting, along with CBSA Supt. Bryce McRae, that Mounties would not be able to intercept and arrest Meng at the gate. He testified that CBSA conduct its admissibility exam first, though. like his colleagues did not recall who made the final decision, saying "that's how (he'd) been trained to do it." TDC_ARTICLE_STOP I think we have our winner here. The other CBSA officers seemed, reading between the lines, kind of freaked out at how obviously slimy and dubious this OP was. It turns out Dhillon was the guy who, laughably, suggested that the RCMP would be unable to intercept and arrest Meng at the gate, thus necessitating them going onboard the plane. He also made the absurd decision to interview the woman first, delaying her arrest, but giving them the opportunity to sieze her equipment, two phones, a laptop, a tablet, and getting her passcodes. Then they could accidentally-on-purpose give the RCMP the loot, knowing that the RCMP could not legally obtain those items. TDC_ARTICLE_START Dhillon, who joined the agency in 2005, testified that he was the CBSA supervisor who relayed questions from the CBSA National Security Unit to one of the examining officers. Near the end of Meng's exam, Dhillon said he left the supervisors' office and approached the counter, where he began questioning Meng directly. He rejected accusations he was trying to gather evidence for the FBI, and instead stated he had national security concerns. Based on his Wikipedia research, Dhillon testified, he asked Meng if her company "sold products in countries that they should not" and specifically if Huawei "sold products or did business in Iran." He testified that based on Meng's "non-verbal behavior...there's more to that story I was never able to explore." Dhillon said he made no mention to Meng of the extradition warrant or U.S. fraud charges (which dealt with Huawei's business in Iran) because, he testified, he "wanted (Meng) to speak to it." He also admitted he did not tell Meng that RCMP were waiting to arrest her. During her cross-examination, Duckett accused Dhillon of lying on the stand and making up his Wikipedia research as a cover story in order to ask Meng about Iran, instead alleging he learned was told about Iran by RCMP during the morning meeting. Duckett called the research a "creation after the fact" and asked why Dhillon had singled out Iran, but not other countries mentioned on the Wikipedia page including North Korea, Venezuela, and Syria. Dhillon categorically rejected Duckett's accusations. He also testified that the RCMP did not "instruct (him) to do anything that day." TDC_ARTICLE_STOP I'm not sure much needs to be said. CBSA Superintendent Sanjit Dhillon is clearly lying, and clearly was in on this OP. Boy would I ever have enjoyed being the lawyer who got to interrogate him. TDC_ARTICLE_START CBSA Supt. Bryce McRae testified he first became aware of the Meng case on Nov. 30, when the CBSA got a call, which emails filed in court show was from FBI legal attaché Sherri Onks. TDC_ARTICLE_STOP THERE WAS NO COLLUSION WITH THE FBI, THAT'S JUST A VICIOUS NEO-NAZI CONSPIRACY. ANY AND ALL EMAILS WITH THE FBI WERE PURELY FOR SETTING UP GOLF TIMES. TDC_ARTICLE_START McRae also testified he did not discipline Officer Kirkland for his mistake in providing Meng's passcodes to the RCMP. TDC_ARTICLE_STOP Well, there you have it. I want to summarize this all up in two different ways. The first, what this means overall, and why Globo Homo Schlomo is doing this OP in the first place. 1) Zionist Jews hate Iran, and want it destroyed. 2) China has deals with Iran, circumventing U.S. Sanctions. 3) As an attempted Power Move, ZOG arrests Meng Wanzhou, and holds her as a political prisoner, in the hopes of getting concessions. 4) Globo Homo Schlomo Tech Conglomerates can't actually compete with cheaply made Chinese Phones, especially now that they're good. Doing things to Huwaii allows them to exploit us much more easily. You see this same garbage with the fake "security concerns" from the Chinese Owned TikTok, while Western Corporations openly spy on everything you do with your phone/computer. 5) Huwaii and other tech corporations won't cooperate with our Intelligence Agencies to spy on us, so they need to be destroyed, or made to do that. Arresting Meng gives them leverage for this purpose, as stated in point 3. If we now take a very close look at what's going on with the details of this case, we see many obvious problems. 1) RCMP officers pretended Meng Wanzhou had zero ties in Canada, despite owning two homes, and having Permanent Residency Status. 2) Someone between the RCMP and CSBA pretended that a 50 year old Asian lady, by herself, required a huge security team to arrest. This was clearly done as a show, to humiliate Meng Wanzhou, for political reasons. 3) Adding on to that, the utter absurdity of pretending they needed to go onto the plane, because this Asian Lady was really fast or something, or maybe she was going to hoodini her way off the side of the plane or something retarded, is so beyond stupid that it can only be argued in bad faith. They ultimately decided the optics were too bad, but that this was even considered shows that this was done to humiliate Meng, and the Chinese more broadly. 4) There was no reason for the CBSA investigation to happen before the RCMP investigation. Or rather, no valid reason. Instead, this was done to fish out as much information as possible, with Meng not having a lawyer. 5) Even more importantly, the CBSA had the authority to, without a warrant, confiscate materials such as Meng's laptop, phone, and phone passcodes. The RCMP does not legally have the authority to obtain those materials. 6) The CBSA then pulled the world's least believable "whoopsie," and "accidentally," gave information the RCMP would not legally be able to obtain, such as phone passcodes, to the RCMP. As well as the two phones, the laptop, and the tablet. 7) Nobody in the CBSA was disciplined in any way for this. 8) The RCMP "didn't think anything of it," when presented with materials, data and information that they would not be legally allowed to obtain. 9) The RCMP then refused to give back any of Meng's belongings, using the baffling excuse that doing so would provide a "lack of transparency," despite objectively doing the opposite. They then logged her passcodes because "they had already been siezed," despite this being illegal for the RCMP to obtain. 10) Multiple RCMP officers and CBSA officers have strenuosly denied any contact with the FBI, but we have emails of them talking with FBI agents. And many others, which I might include in an update, although I think this serves as a good synopsis for now.