Prime Minister's wife at the Netanyahu trial hearing: "In the middle of a war, no renovation is done"/Bini Ashkenazi
When Attorney Amit Hadad, Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu's attorney, tells the judges in the courtroom that he is having difficulty managing the Prime Minister's defense due to the war, he is telling the truth, or at least I would like to think so, because if he is not telling the truth, that is, if Netanyahu is busy In matters other than the war, then we are in a very bad situation. So for the purpose of the discussion, let's accept Hadad's words as truth, according to which Netanyahu has no time for him, and since Hadad speaks for Netanyahu, Haddad's truth is Netanyahu's truth. Well, the same truth of Netanyahu proves more than any He lied to all of us, how much he managed to deceive an entire country, and in particular 11 judges of the Supreme Court.
Netanyahu during the war/official website, Attorney General Avi Ohion
And here is the explanation: three and a half years ago, the High Court discussed the question of whether a person accused of crimes can serve as prime minister. The question also dealt with the conflicts of interest inherent in the situation (which we learned to know well during the psychotic period of dealing with the political revolution), as well as the question of whether a person who needs to evacuate for self-defense, can manage the affairs of the state at the same time. This question was also asked in other petitions, such as the petition for extradition. The answer given to the second question is clearly yes, especially since we are dealing - in my free translation - with a superman like Netanyahu. Both Netanyahu's lawyers and his mouthpieces stood by this answer in the media, when they were presented with a situation in which Israel would find itself in a military conflict. Today we know that this answer was a gross lie.
The truth, as mentioned, is now being told by Netanyahu's criminal defense attorney. In his meandering way, he is telling the court and the prosecutor's office that it simply does not go together. Of course, the way to his method to solve The problem is not to ask his client to vacate his seat and allow someone free of personal concerns to lead Israel in a time of war. The way he chooses, unsurprisingly, is to ask the court for leniency, as if Netanyahu has not been given enough leniency up to now. In short, forget the nonsense they told To you for equality before the law.
At the end of the previous hearing, prosecutor Alon Gildin told the judges the following: "Attorney Hadad contacted us at the beginning of January and said that he was unable to question the witnesses due to the situation." Hadad explained in court that they were "trying to think of all kinds of creative ideas in this matter... We don't know how to interrogate witnesses... without having a relationship with the client... I think my friends and the panel understand that I have an obligation to the client and cannot investigate without him." We will immediately get to the "creative ideas", but why in the world do the honorable judges who are severely anemic in conducting the trial not They explain to the lawyer that this is what his client should have thought about before deciding that he can lead Israel while a trial is underway against him. The judges are shamefully silent in the face of this disdain for the rule of law.
More in Walla!
Pietro is celebrating a round birthday and you enjoy a once-in-60-years sale
In collaboration with Pitro
A winding road.
Netanyahu's lawyer, attorney Amit Haddad/Flash 90, Yonatan Zindel
Now read carefully what is one of the "creative solutions" offered by Hadad: "A: There may be a ceasefire, we hear in the media."
I refuse to believe I typed that.
What does Hadad say here to the court?
How exactly is the question of the order of witnesses in the Netanyahu trial related to Sinwar's answer to the mediators' proposal?
The rule of law is disintegrating in front of our eyes and in front of the staring eyes of three judges, whose silence treats this statement as legitimate.
We are at the end of the lawsuit.
When it ends, there will be a respite, the length of which is not yet clear, and then the defense case will begin.
The first witness should of course be defendant No. 1, Binyamin Netanyahu.
When will his testimony begin?
It depends on two procedures that the defense is considering.
One, a claim of defense against justice (which can be asserted either at the end of the prosecution's case or at the end of the entire evidence phase), and the second, a claim of "no answer to blame", the purpose of which is to end the trial with an acquittal without the defense being heard at all.
Since the defense attorneys know that the chance of this claim being accepted by the judges is low, it is doubtful that they will follow it.
They have a lot to lose by failing in this process.
By the way, the bizarre incident in Judge Rebecca Friedman-Feldman's office, in which the judges suggested that the prosecution drop the bribery clause, only pushes the defense attorneys away from the plea that "there should be no recriminations", since it is possible to learn from them.
From the judges' suggestion, we can learn that if the bribe was mentioned as having no chance of conviction, then what was not mentioned - breach of trust - does have a chance.
If the defense attorneys decide to crack one of these two procedures, and certainly if they choose to go for both, it is clear that Netanyahu will not take the witness stand before the next trial year, that is, in September, and this is also an optimistic scenario.
If none of the procedures are cracked, there is a chance that Netanyahu will testify as early as May, but this is also a very optimistic scenario that is unlikely to happen.
It is clear that the defense attorneys will do everything to delay his testimony, one way or another, at least until September.
It all depends on the question of how many months of break the judges will give between the case of the prosecution and the defense.
are silent despite the disdain for the rule of law.
The head of the panel of judges in the Netanyahu trial Rivka Friedman Feldman/Official website, spokeswoman for the Judiciary
Netanyahu thinks he is allowed everything
So what state will Israel be in when its prime minister faces cross-examination every day for approximately three months?
Will there be a war in the north?
Will we only be in the static phase in Gaza, where we are trying to find a solution for the day after, and in the meantime we are dealing with guerrilla warfare against our forces?
Will we even be in the midst of a regional conflagration?
When my colleague Sepi Ovadia asked Netanyahu at one of his last press conferences how he would run the country when he stood on the witness stand, the latter as expected attacked the questioner and then hissed that "lawyers will handle it as they have done until now".
On the one hand, a puzzling answer since the lawyers cannot stand to testify in his place.
On the other hand, go find out what surprises the lawyers will pull out.
After all, until now Netanyahu has managed to get almost everything he wanted from the court.
He shows up for the hearings whenever he wants, the hearings are done lazily, the long and absurd cross-examinations are not stopped by the judges, so it is clear why Netanyahu thinks by and large that everything will be fine.
Here, after all, he told the High Court that he would have no problem waging war when he is on trial, and now he is telling the judges the opposite: to consider him, because it is a problem to wage war when he is on trial. He is allowed everything.
The contempt for the system and procedure came yesterday (Wednesday) again Manifested in the ridiculous tactic of coming to the courtroom every time he appears until Netanyahu wants to influence his testimony. This happened during the testimony of Nir Hefetz and Shlomo Filber, when Netanyahu deviated from his custom and came to the courtroom, and his wife Sara was sent to Milchan's testimony in London. She shamelessly had lively conversations with him between Testimony. Yesterday she was again sent to the front, this time for the testimony of the former attorney general, Yehuda Weinstein, who in the past was also Netanyahu's lawyer.
Sara Netanyahu and Yehuda Weinstein yesterday at Dion/Flash 90, Yonatan Zindel
Weinstein was asked to testify about a very specific matter concerning the advice he gave or did not give to Netanyahu regarding the gifts from Milchan.
Netanyahu claimed in his investigation that Weinstein advised him on the matter.
Weinstein said yesterday that he was not and was not created.
Unlike the Milchan case, it seems that this time the presence of Mrs. Netanyahu did not particularly affect the witness and he was careful not to fall into the traps that Hadad tried to throw him into.
"Did you know that the relationship between politics and the media is a very close relationship?" Haddad asked, trying to get Weinstein to make a statement against the concept of the 4000 file submitted by his replacement.
"I can't answer that," Weinstein replied.
"I don't understand the question, you want me to be an expert witness."
In short, Weinstein made it clear to Hadad that he would look for suckers elsewhere.
But in the meantime, the big suckers are Israeli citizens.
Hadad is supposed to reply to the prosecutor's office today about how he intends to deal with the list of witnesses he needs to prepare for, and whether he wants to change the order of witnesses due to the war.
I wonder if another creative solution like the "ceasefire" will come up, because for now there is no ceasefire and the abductees have not yet returned.
Perhaps before his answer, Hadad should have entered a meeting of the War Cabinet, to coordinate the legal schedule with the operational schedule.
Sounds crazy?
Not much more than what was said inside the court.
Everything here is crooked and corrupt, and those affected by this situation are both the rule of law and Israel's security.
After all, how can you trust the judgment of a leader, whose lawyer in court ties the procedures of his trial with the procedures of war?
More on the same topic:
Benjamin Netanyahu
The Netanyahu trial
Sarah Netanyahu
Yehuda Weinstein
Gaza war
War of Iron Swords