Singh

MEMORANDUM *

We deny Shamsher Singh’s (“Singh”) petition for review because substantial evidence supports both the IJ’s adverse credibility finding and the negative inference he drew from Singh’s failure to produce his Canadian asylum application. The IJ articulated a legitimate basis for questioning Singh’s credibility, and offered specific, substantial, and nexus-based reasons for *571 disbelief. Gui v. INS, 280 F.3d 1217, 1225 (9th Cir.2002); Salaam v. INS, 229 F.3d 1234, 1238 (9th Cir.2000) (per curiam).

Singh argues that his testimony credibly established persecution on the basis of imputed political opinion. However, the IJ found critical inconsistencies in Singh’s testimony going to the heart of his claim: (1) Singh’s inconsistent accounts of his Mends’ cause of death. Because Singh’s asylum claim rests in part on evidence of his Mends’ death for their political views, Singh’s testimony about them is a substantial inconsistency upon which an adverse credibility finding may be based. See Manimbao v. Ashcroft, 329 F.3d 655, 660 (9th Cir.2003).(2) Discrepancies in Singh’s account of police harassment. Singh’s inconsistent accounts of when the police were harassing his family…