Netanyahu in cross-examination: I was ‘political carcass' from 1999 to 2002

Yahoo

3 days ago

The prosecution's questioning, led by attorney Yehonatan Tadmor, focused on the depth and extent of Netanyahu's friendship with Arnon Milchan.
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu was a 'political carcass' between 1999 and 2002 - meaning that his friendship with billionaire Hollywood producer-turned state's witness Arnon Milchan was purely personal, the prime minister argued against the prosecution's notions, at the cross-examination hearing of his criminal trial testimony on Wednesday.
The prosecution's questioning, led by attorney Yehonatan Tadmor, focused on the depth and extent of Netanyahu's friendship with Milchan, at the hearing in the Tel Aviv District Court.
The prosecution's thesis is that this friendship had political manifestations, laying out the basis for Case 1000 - one of the three cases levied against the prime minister - while Netanyahu insisted that the friendship was deeply personal, and that the insinuation that it was political is beneath it.
Unlike on Tuesday, the prosecution on Wednesday moved its questioning further along and got more of them in, though the defense objected wherever it could. The judges showed a little less leniency towards the delays on Wednesday, preferring in most cases to move the questioning along.
In Case 1000, or the 'Illegal Gifts' affair, Netanyahu is on trial for advancing legislation favorable to Milchan, while receiving gifts from him in the form of cigars and champagne, worth thousands of shekels.
Tadmor asked about what was dubbed the 'Bibi Law,' which was passed in 2002 and permitted the running of politicians who had previously served as prime ministers. At the time, this would only have been applicable to Netanyahu. However, the coalition at the time fell soon after, making the law irrelevant.
In what became a common objection, every time the prosecution tried to present new information with which to base questions off of to Netanyahu, the defense objected on the same legal grounds as on Tuesday: The materials were contradictory and external to those already presented in the case, and so are invalid.
Judge Oded Shaham insisted that the decision issued on the matter on Tuesday - 'which we all remember clearly' - specified that submitting evidence during cross-examination is not within the accepted legal framework.
The judges later permitted the presentation of such materials, not to be submitted as evidence, but rather only presented to gauge an answer from Netanyahu, starting from next week. What is valuable to the prosecution here is Netanyahu's answer, less the materials themselves.
Tadmor argued that the 'Bibi Law,' which was proposed as an amendment to Basic Law: The Government, was advanced with Netanyahu in mind. It passed initial readings in the Knesset on December 18, 2000, in a 63-45 vote. Former Prime Minister Ariel Sharon won the elections that came shortly thereafter.
Tadmor explained that Netanyahu was the only relevant public figure it would have related to at the time. The question then, regarding those years, was the relevance of the friendship with Milchan at that time, around 1999, when it would have carried political consequences.
Tadmor asked Netanyahu what he knew of the public's perception of the law itself. 'I understood at the time that some people wanted me back, but I knew that I had no such intention, a sentiment I shared with Milchan.'
He added, pointedly, 'I said this to you yesterday: I had no intention to return to politics.'
He explained, 'From 1999 until 2002, I was out of the political picture, both because I couldn't get back in, and because I didn't want to.'
Tadmor pointed out that Netanyahu viewing and calling himself a 'political carcass' throughout this series of questions is not an account he told police in his interrogations, and also that one month after he lost the Likud primaries in 2002 to Sharon, he was made foreign minister and finance minister in his government - so how could he have asserted that his political career was over when he jumped right into it?
Netanyahu insisted that between 1999 and 2002, he never wanted to return to politics, and that this was clear to his close circles, to people like Milchan. Tadmor insisted, in turn, that this simply wasn't true specifically in 2002, around election time.
Netanyahu explained that he had no political horizon to return to. 'Israel was in its worst financial position it had been in years. I knew that these positions would bury me, and even more than that - I never stood a chance to become prime minister.'
He continued, 'So I asked myself: If I were to become prime minister again, why would that be? The answers for me were the financial mess and Iran, though I knew that the price for it would be massive. But, I figured I would fulfill at least one of my goals - to shift Israel financially.'
He added that he knew, going into it, that it was political suicide.
What this does is underscore the prosecution's position, that his political reality changed or was influenced by his friendship with Milchan.
In 2005, Netanyahu was elected as opposition head, a position he served in until 2009, when he became prime minister. Tadmor proposed that being an opposition head is not a 'political carcass,' and that he had indeed planned his return to politics, in what was presumably an attempt to show inconsistencies in Netanyahu's character as a witness.
'My understanding at the time, at least during those first two years [1999-2001], was that my political life span was over. It took time for that to change,' explained Netanyahu.
Tadmor presented a poll from the time showing that Ehud Olmert's party, Kadima, was sinking. Olmert won the elections in 2006 and served as prime minister until 2009.
One year before the elections, a Smith Institute poll commissioned by Ynet found that Netanyahu was 'the most appropriate figure to lead the country,' Tadmor showed. Netanyahu dismissed it, saying that other polls showed the exact opposite and that, in fact, Kadima bounced back.
'My friendship with Milchan was completely disconnected from politics and had no effect or was affected by any of my political ups and downs!' Netanyahu charged.
The prime minister insisted that politically, he was beaten from 2006 to 2009, and that his friendship with Milchan stayed even stronger throughout these 'intense political losses.'
Netanyahu moved to attack Tadmor, saying that he was pushing a specific narrative that doesn't exist. Netanyahu's outburst gave Tadmor the invisible point he really wanted - calling his reliability into question.
'This whole narrative line is absurd,' said Netanyahu.
Tadmor said, 'The way in which you describe your closeness and the development of your friendship doesn't reflect reality.'
Netanyahu responded, 'The opposite is true: We had a true and real friendship right off the bat, a friendship that bled into our family relations as well.'