The Limited Times

Now you can see non-English news...

When the smoke screen dissipates, the work in the eyes will be revealed: Towards the testimony of Shlomo Pilber in the 4000 case - Walla! news

2022-03-17T16:50:15.463Z


The second state witness in the Netanyahu trial, who is expected to testify next week, managed for months to transform through media tweets and moves from a rejected and slandered man in the Netanyahu camp, to a well-liked man who raises many hopes. What they do not understand is that his real room for maneuver in his testimony in court is very narrow


The Netanyahu trial

When the smoke screen dissipates, the work in the eyes will be revealed: in preparation for the testimony of Shlomo Pilber in the 4000 case

The second state witness in the Netanyahu trial, who is expected to testify next week, managed for months to transform through media tweets and moves from a rejected and slandered man in the Netanyahu camp, to a well-liked man who raises many hopes.

What they do not understand is that his real room for maneuver in his testimony in court is very narrow

Welcome read

17/03/2022

Thursday, 17 March 2022, 18:30 Updated: 18:32

  • Share on Facebook

  • Share on WhatsApp

  • Share on Twitter

  • Share on Email

  • Share on general

  • Comments

    Comments

In the video: Testimony of the Ministry of Communications' spokesperson in the Alps files (Photo: Roni Knafo)

If there is no further delay, on Wednesday next week the second state witness in the Netanyahu trial will appear on the witness stand.



It will be Shlomo

Pilber, who served in the relevant period for the accusations from the director general of the Ministry of Communications under Benjamin Netanyahu.

, Nati Tucker, and at one point, when he was strengthening the hands of Simon Riklin (who also wrote harsh words about Tucker), tweeted the reporter like this: "Do not underestimate a determined and hateful opponent.

All the troll that the state has been going through for three years was born of some delusional 'thesis' that they presented and permeated like a poisonous worm to the investigative and enforcement bodies.

And only with great delay does everyone now understand that the factual infrastructure they presented to the public was false, and reality reveals their disgrace. "



My colleagues Chen Ma'anit, Neta'el Bendel and others rightly pointed out to their followers the fact that a state witness, a few days before the beginning of his testimony, calls the thesis of the prosecution in whose name he testifies as an illusory and toxic thesis.

But then, about two hours later, perhaps after being a little startled by what he said (and Pilber, as you will see later, he is not really the bravest guy in the neighborhood), he tweeted: So originally, BK) with the representative of the "People's Daily" The Marker - Nati Tucker.

He referred only to his articles and newspaper publications. "

More on Walla!

Prosecution: Spyware was used against Pilber in a manner that exceeded the order, but did not gather material relevant to the case

To the full article

More on Walla!

  • Netanyahu breaks silence after about two weeks: "The claim that I agreed to the disgrace is not true"

  • Hefetz's testimony ended: "Standing in front of Netanyahu was as difficult as tearing the Red Sea"

  • Are you entitled to a disabled card and are unable to receive it?

    This is the solution

Post a teaser on Twitter.

Shlomo Pilber (Photo: Flash 90, Yonatan Zindel)

The truth is that I'm probably particularly challenged, since after that clarification I got even more confused.

After all, in the initial tweet he explicitly wrote: that the "delusional" thesis, "permeated like a poisonous worm into the bodies of investigation and enforcement."

So how exactly did he relate, "to his articles and newspaper publications only"?

How does it work?

It does not work out, but this is how Pilber has been mixing the public for many months, and it is not inconceivable that this mixing will also accompany his testimony in court.



Before that, a little order: Pilber was questioned about the Bezeq affair (even before the 4000 case) in the summer of 2017. This investigation was preceded by a State Comptroller's report, in which Pilber was called a "captive regulator."

Investigators from the Securities Authority found evidence that Pilber assisted Elowitz from the Ministry of Communications in an unusual way, but they did not really fully understand why, what was his interest?

The researchers did not find any hint in favor of personal enjoyment he received from the Alovichs;

Then came the 4000 case which, ostensibly, solved the mystery.



From him, too, it must be said, no personal financial benefit accrued to Pilber, but the evidence of an alleged bribery deal between Netanyahu and Elovich, of which Pilber had a key role, did emerge.

Pilber was arrested on 18.2.18, and two days later had already signed a state witness agreement;

He was so nimble that even Nir Hefetz was two weeks ahead of him.

When Hefetz explained in court why he decided to sign, he gave Pilber's signature crucial weight.

In other words, Pilber has basic shares in the fact that Netanyahu is on trial in the 4000 case.

"Captive Regulator."

Shlomo Pilber in a hearing to extend his detention (Photo: Walla! NEWS system, without credit)

Initially, after the signing, Pilber was ostracized, rejected, hated, in the political camp where he grew up and was identified with him all his life.

Yehoram Gaon called him: "Malshan, Yehuda Ish Krayot."

MK Dudi Amsalem called him "inferior, immoral, delinquent"; Prime Minister?

What was promised to you?

Momo, the left is using you to overthrow the Likud. "Following the incident, an investigation was opened against the prime minister's advisers, Ofer Golan and Jonathan Orich, who allegedly were behind the project (about what later developed between the two and Pilber, immediately).



Since then, Pilber has done everything to please his quarry reactor.

He did so with countless tweets that support Netanyahu and are hostile to his opponents, as well as in a few media interviews.

In the meantime, he released a sort of hint that he, Pilber, is the furthest from an old Shula model, meaning that he is not really betraying his political patron, Netanyahu.

"In the end everything will be clear," he said several times in different variations.

This strategy, it must be said, succeeded him.



Pilber has dramatically lowered the level of hostility towards him, and today not only is he not ostracized, he is also getting many sympathetic reactions on Twitter from the bibist base.

He managed to completely forget from the base men the fact that he, Pilber, was the first in the 4000 case, two days after his arrest, to cross the lines in exchange for complete criminal immunity for his actions.

Pilber's connection with his base is probably also important to him emotionally, socially, but it can certainly be assumed that he is also businesslike.

Pilber is the owner of Direct Falls, a company that deals with polls and political and business strategy.

Began collaborating with Pilber.

Ofer Golan (Photo: Reuven Castro)

The culmination of the media journey home was when he revealed to the public how he and the two suspects in his harassment as a witness, Jonathan Orich and Ofer Golan, Netanyahu's advisers, began cooperating in business.

The media move of exposing this business relationship was accompanied by a thesis that says: If the harasser was indeed harassed, how is it that he is now connected to the harasser?

Here, said the one who said, this is the proof that there was no harassment here.

This is of course a far-fetched thesis that stems from either a brilliant spin, or a misunderstanding of the offense concept of "witness harassment."



If already the opposite is true.

Witness harassment is not the equivalent of sexual harassment, or telephone harassment;

The main victim of harassing the witness in a criminal trial is not the witness (he may be a secondary victim), but the state, for which the witness is supposed to testify.

That is, the concern is that stakeholders want to influence until he tells the truth.

If anything, the rationale surrounding the harassment stick is true of the carrots they give forever.

On the contrary, perhaps carrots are more effective.

Aurich and Golan's business partnership with Pilber could theoretically affect his testimony no less than the harassment under his house with speakers.



Does this mean that this partnership is legally problematic?

Formally probably not.

It turns out that Orich and Golan's lawyers approached the State Attorney's Office before this move to tell them about this business partnership, but all the State Attorney's Office could do was warn Pilber, Golan and Orich that they should not talk to each other about the content of their testimony during their joint business activities.

The commitment of course was given.

There is no doubt that the readers of this article came to their satisfaction.

In any case, the move finally brought Pilber back into the lap of the bibist base.

Pilber's testimony is likely to cause him great legal damage.

Benjamin Netanyahu (Photo: Flash 90, Olbia Fitoussi)

So to what extent will Pilber's endless desire to please the bassist who felt so betrayed by him in 2018 affect his testimony?

After all, what is all this tweeting and flattery worth in the end, if Pilber repeats in his testimony what he said to the police?

Well, on the one hand, in my estimation, Pilber will not deviate from his testimony to the police, as he knows full well that if he does, he will violate the agreement with the state and may be prosecuted for the acts he confessed to under the agreement.



On the other hand, alongside the facts he will repeat, he will try to step up as much as he can to Netanyahu's defense music.

Pilber will say in a big way: Yes, we talked about Elovich's affairs, yes Netanyahu promoted the Bezeq-Yis merger, but what's the problem, Netanyahu is the Minister of Communications.

Everything was matter-of-fact and professional.

Object testimonial model but upgraded.

It will not be that simple.



Pilber's testimony is long and detailed, but it has some record events.

The most prominent of these is the so-called "armchair talk".

Immediately after Pilber took over as director general of the Ministry of Communications in 2015, Pilber testified that Netanyahu met with him and asked him to help Shaul Alovich with the Bezeq-Yes merger, and at the same time asked him to moderate the price reduction, signaling the famous hand gesture. Very economic for Elovich (but very bad for the citizens.) This conversation, it must be said, was initially denied by Netanyahu and then said that he did not really remember it.

Will he testify that he talked to him?

Shaul Alovich in court (Photo: Flash 90, Yonatan Zindel)

If Pilber approves of this conversation, no matter how he colors it, he will, as he has already done, cause great legal damage to Netanyahu.

As stated, I am willing to take the risk and appreciate that Pilber's noise and ringtones are mostly communicative and less of legal significance.

Pilber will do what's good for Pilber.

So far it has gone not bad for him;

Fact is, on the one hand he managed to get immunity from prosecution in exchange for testimony against Netanyahu, and on the other hand he signed a business partnership with his advisers and he is getting sympathy today on the biblical base.

To understand Pilber's level of cynicism, here's the following fantastic historical story:



After Rabin's assassination, Pilber published an extreme conspiratorial article in the right-wing newspaper Nakuda, according to which Rabin was not really murdered because of Yigal Amir's ideological motives, but following a GSS work accident, following the organization's desire to blame the right. To the right-wing mainstream and appointed by Netanyahu to the post of director general of the Ministry of Communications, this story was published in the press, and then Pilber responded as follows: "I do not believe and did not believe in the conspiracy theory even then."



Pilber said in his response that he was merely there to rent, and that the person who actually wrote the article was a point editor at the time, Uri Elitzur: "Towards the closing of the issue," Pilber said. Yesha, and asked me to sign the article out of fear for his status as a publicist. "

This reaction is inconceivable, especially in light of the fact that Elitzur died a year earlier, so no one could check with him if this Pilber story was true.

Is it because he, Elitzur, "feared for his status as a publicist," asked the young Pilber to publish his conspiratorial remarks?

This reaction is a lesson in cynicism and escape from responsibility, and explains to some extent, how a man like Pilber on the one hand signs a state-of-the-art agreement against Netanyahu, and on the other hand hints to Bays that everything has changed and he is in favor of Netanyahu.



And after all that, it's hard to assess right now what the outcome of the game between the defense and the prosecution will be at the end of Pilber's testimony;

What can be said?

This game of Pilber's allusion in recent months to "things that will become clear in the future," culminating in a tweet from yesterday about the toxic thesis that has seeped into law enforcement, is a smokescreen.

Pilber knows well, and knew in real time, what he had signed.

Therefore, one of two things: either, in order to extricate himself from a criminal case, he cooperated in a legal plot against Netanyahu;

Or he simply understood well, in real time, that the activity he took part in for Elovich was illegal, and out of that understanding he signed a state witness agreement.

All of Pilber's allusions to some other mysterious reality are eye work.

  • news

  • Opinions and interpretations

Tags

  • Shlomo Pilber

  • Benjamin Netanyahu

  • The Netanyahu trial

Source: walla

All news articles on 2022-03-17

You may like

Trends 24h

News/Politics 2024-03-28T06:04:53.137Z

Latest

© Communities 2019 - Privacy

The information on this site is from external sources that are not under our control.
The inclusion of any links does not necessarily imply a recommendation or endorse the views expressed within them.