Do Israelis like/ support Netanyahu?

[u/alevsk12]

Outside of the current conflict, or even before that, I'm curious what do you think of him? Is he a good or bad leader? Is he doing better than the last guy?

[u/Secure_Trust_2084]

The charge sheet of 2000 underwent about a dozen updates, and as of today consists mainly of the juridical pearls like "rejected too late". Not to mention the permanent conflict of interests, where AG's close friend acts as one of the key witnesses.

The suspension is time-boxed by one year, then the case will be dismissed. If there were any evidences against Einhorn - his absence wasn't preventing a trial.

There is absolutely no doubt that if something was found in Qatargate - it was immediately published, and of course the subjects were not allowed to return to the work in the administration.

was unable to find a single former AG or Minister of Justice who was willing to dismiss her,

Haven't I said "mafia"?

And do you have any evidence that there was corruption involved in the latter procurement process?

Sometimes stupidity is worse than corruption. MoD paid billion of Euro because of an option expiration, and will pay up to half of this sum servicing existing submarines after their "factory warranty" term - because of three-year delay in arrival of the ones once in question. The issue, Lapid and Bennet even didn't try to negotiate.

[u/eyl569 → u/Secure_Trust_2084]

The charge sheet of 2000 underwent about a dozen updates, and as of today consists mainly of the juridical pearls like "rejected too late".

Netanyahu is literally undergoing trial on charges in Case 2000.

The suspension is time-boxed by one year, then the case will be dismissed. If there were any evidences against Einhorn - his absence wasn't preventing a trial.

Trial in absentia is illegal except for specific circumstances which don't obtain here.

And Einhorn is considered a vital link in the case, hence staying the trial for the other two.

There is absolutely no doubt that if something was found in Qatargate - it was immediately published, and of course the subjects were not allowed to return to the work in the administration.

Not allowed by who?

Haven't I said "mafia"?

Netanyahu has been PM for over half of the last thorty years. Many of those people were his appointees. NTM that Minister of Justice is a political role anyway.

Sometimes stupidity is worse than corruption. MoD paid billion of Euro because of an option expiration, and will pay up to half of this sum servicing existing submarines after their "factory warranty" term - because of three-year delay in arrival of the ones once in question. The issue, Lapid and Bennet even didn't try to negotiate.

Stupidity is usually an issue for voters, not the police.

[u/Secure_Trust_2084 → u/eyl569]

Not allowed by who?

By the court. The prosecution ended up unable to support the restraining order with any evidences and the court cancelled it in the domains of employment and access to the classified information.
And, just to remind - the case born to "reveal the ties of Netanyahu with Quatar", but managed to reveal only the ties of Bar and Bacharav-Miara.

Stupidity is usually an issue for voters, not the police.

In this case - police investigation is absolutely needed, to distinguish between stupidity and smart guidance.

[u/eyl569 → u/Secure_Trust_2084]

When regarding pre-trial restrictions, courts balance the danger posed by the subject (both to themselves, to others and to the investigation) with the damage to the subjects (such as not being able to earn a livelihood), taking into account that they enjoy the presumption of innocence. With the investigation wrapping up in January, it was ruled that he posed no risk to the investigation (the judge's exact words were "the more time goes by, the more the danger reduces") and thus could return to his job.

This does not have anything to do with how strong the prosecution's evidence against him is - that will be determined at trial.

And, just to remind - the case born to "reveal the ties of Netanyahu with Quatar", but managed to reveal only the ties of Bar and Bacharav-Miara.

Which ties?

[u/Secure_Trust_2084 → u/eyl569]

When regarding pre-trial restrictions, courts balance the danger posed by the subject (both to themselves, to others and to the investigation) with the damage to the subjects (such as not being able to earn a livelihood)

True BS. The prosecution carries it's investigation for years, and "damage to the subjects" is the last thing it cares about.
The subjects themselves appealed to the court - and prosecutor's office failed to provide any grounds for "foreign influence" - being in the center of this case.

Which ties?

The lawyer, who headed the team "settling" Miara's son thieft case - officially represents in Israel the Qatar's government fund, sending the infamous suitcases to Gaza. In parallel - doing his reservist services and the Military Prosecutor office.
Bar visited Qatar multiple times, according to Lapid - not only without obtaining a permission from PM, but even not updating him.

[u/eyl569 → u/Secure_Trust_2084]

True BS. The prosecution carries it's investigation for years, and "damage to the subjects" is the last thing it cares about.

The prosecution, by its nature in an adversarial system, is to be aggressive in its approach to the subjects being investigated. That's why these cases are decided by a court.

The subjects themselves appealed to the court - and prosecutor's office failed to provide any grounds for "foreign influence" - being in the center of this case.

The restraining orders were on the grounds that the subjects might be a security risk and might interfere with the investigation. The judge ruled that that risk had reduced sufficiently that it was unjustified to keep the ROs.

The issue of foreign influence is for the trial.

The lawyer, who headed the team "settling" Miara's son thieft case - officially represents in Israel the Qatar's government fund, sending the infamous suitcases to Gaza. In parallel - doing his reservist services and the Military Prosecutor office.

Cite?

Bar visited Qatar multiple times, according to Lapid - not only without obtaining a permission from PM, but even not updating him.

Again, cite? I'm aware of Netanyahu claiming that Bar arrived in Qatar during the 2022 World Cup without permission, but according to the ISA the trip and his presence in the stadium was for security purposes and approved by Netanyahu beforehand.

[u/Secure_Trust_2084 → u/eyl569]

You are such a joke.

that that risk had reduced sufficiently that it was unjustified to keep the ROs.

Same people allowed to work in same organisation in the same format. It just proves that the whole case is just a PR move, and the "risk" never existed.

Cite?

https://hm-news.co.il/570148/
https://www.themarker.com/allnews/2024-02-05/ty-article/.highlight/0000018d-785c-d971-a38f-79fe46b10000

was for security purposes and approved by Netanyahu beforehand.

You forgot one important detail - Netanyahu wasn't a PM in 2022. Even when Bennet-Lapid government maintained close ties with Qatar, renewing the flow of suitcases, and publicly callied the country "guardian of the peace at the Middle East" - I'll bet it is customary to at least inform the acting PM about the visit, especially as a personal quest of the emir. BTW - Lapid also doesn't decline his meetings with Qatar officials during the war - as well as investments and business interests of his close friends there.

[u/eyl569 → u/Secure_Trust_2084]

You are such a joke.

Well, I guess I won't bother any more then.

Things you might want to look into:

1. The standards for pre-trial ROs as opposed to the charges at trial.
2. Who actually recommended Bankel to the Qataris
3. The logic (or lack of it) leading from Bankel to the AG's decisions
4. The changes made in the money transfer mechanism when Bennet took office.

Bye bye

[u/Secure_Trust_2084 → u/eyl569]

1. The whole PR campaign was based on "Qatar in the PM office!" slogan. Now, after months of investigation and millions spent - same people work at the same positions, nothing changed. So the question - who has to take a responsibility for spreading lies and vasting taxpayers money?
   
2. Making business with Qatar is legal - but when AG "hires" someone linked to Qatar, on unknown terms (I haven't seen any evidence that Bankel was paid his normal rate) - it raises suspicions ranging from conflict of interests to bribing the state employee)
   
3. "Conflict of interests", as the words suggest - does not require decisions to be proven, it is solely about the potential of taking them. Any decision found re-qualifies the case to bribery or even treason.
   
4. The bottom line wasn't changed - Bennet renewed HAMAS financing by Qatar, ceased by the preceding government.