The truth about life with a deceitful leader

How are we to maintain a reasoned, analytical public discourse in a “post-truth” era of mendacious fabrication? Today, Thomas Jefferson’s adage, “Honesty is the first chapter in the book of wisdom” and Abraham Lincoln’s maxim that “honesty is the best policy” seem like ancient political mythology. Americans didn’t have any problem reelecting Donald Trump even after the Washington Post enumerated his falsehoods and misleading claims, and calculated their average at 50 per day.

In Israel, David Ben Gurion may have railed that “the words of a ‘lying prophet’ are not preserved,” but in recent years, Benjamin Netanyahu has learned otherwise: when the truth gets in the way of a politically convenient narrative, he just alters it.

And so it was at the news conference last week, on the eve of his testimony in court. To make his case to the public, once again the Prime Minister let loose a litany of falsehoods. Indeed, Netanyahu long ago decided that tactically, “the best defense is a “good offense”. He repeatedly attacked the journalists asking legitimate questions as the compulsive liars in the room. As the Israeli press has not yet developed a formal, WaPo-style process for fact-checking, here are just a few of the misrepresentations and blatant “inaccuracies” hurled during his 33-minute, self-righteous, self-congratulatory news conference:

Never Agreed to Consider Leaving the Golan Heights: Netanyahu disparaged any political leader who had ever considered conceding parts of the Golan Heights to Syria, vehemently denying he had done so himself. But the truth is that many knowledgeable people, such as Mossad Head at the time, Danny Yatom along with senior American diplomats involved in the negotiations, like Dennis Ross and the late Martin Indyk, reported otherwise. They claimed that Ron Lauder , Bibi’s unofficial emissary to Damascus, purportedly relayed Syria’s agreement to security arrangements in return for 1967-border territorial concessions, and the prime minister was willing to consider them favorably. In a famous 1999, televised debate, when Netanyahu denied this, former Defense Minister Itzik Mordechai scolded him: “Bibi – look me in the eye” – leaving the young Prime Minister speechless. It may be that Netanyahu was misleading American and Syrian negotiators without any real intentions of retreat. But his ranting that such claims represent “fake news” or part of a conspiracy against him – is farcical.

Politically Motivated Indictments: Netanyahu claimed that Israel’s prosecution, led by his political enemies, had to “invent” new criminal violations to pursue the witchhunt that led to his indictment. The fact is that the Israeli Attorney General who made the call on all three, separate indictments, Amichai Mendelblit, was Netanyahu’s former government secretary, appointed by Bibi himself. Moreover, the entire prosecution wing of the Ministry of Justice was in consensus about the severity of the violations. Mendelblit, in fact, was severely criticized for taking so long to make this fateful decision about his former boss.

Systematically illegitimate Means of Interrogation: When Eli Feldstein the young staffer from the Prime Minister’s press department was arrested for leaking a classified document to the German newspaper Bild, Netanyahu immediately denied prior knowledge about the document or that anyone in his office was involved. At the press conference, however, Netanyahu offered a different story: of course he knew Feldstein whose patriotism and Zionist commitment he praised effusively. Rather, it was Israel’s nefarious police who were at fault for forcing Feldstein into a false confession.

The Prime Minister then went on to lambast “the system” — the outrageous interrogation techniques that he claimed coerced Feldstein (and other Netanyahu associates in the past) to involuntarily confess to illegal activities. Netanyahu railed against the alleged fleas to which suspects were exposed, the isolation, lack of sleep and interrogations conducted with the suspect handcuffed and blindfolded with a flannel blindfold. Yet, none of this was ever alleged by Feldstein’s lawyer, Oded Savorai. What Savorai did say was that despite his claims of being completely unaware, Prime Minister Netanyahu knew very well about the classified document, implying that he had an interest in publicizing it, despite strict prohibitions by military censors — essentially throwing his young staffer “under the bus”.

Netanyahu’s alacrity to testify: When asked whether he would receive a fair trial Netanyahu responded indignantly: “I hear in the press that I am trying to evade testifying. I want to evade? What vanity of vanities! I’ve been waiting eighty years to tell the truth. To finally explode the crazy allegations. Eight years to reveal the system.”

Hmm.

After years of dillydallying when questioning prosecution witnesses, Netanyahu’s attorneys twice requested continuances before starting their defense, twice requested additional continuances to delay the Prime Minister testimony by several months. They continue to try to limit Netanyahu’s time on the witness stand. But, recently the judges have put their foot down. Netanyahu consistently proclaimed that he’d like to have his testimony trial televised, but apparently did not really mean it, as no formal request was ever filed. For four years, the judges in the case have consistently reproached Netanyahu’s legal team for unnecessarily dragging out witnesses’ testimony. At the press conference, Netanyahu emphasized that he did not want special treatment only fair treatment. But of course, throughout the investigation, he enjoyed unusual latitude from the police, who had to make extraordinary efforts to gain access to the Prime Minister for interrogation.

Lack of Public Support for a National Commission of Inquiry about October 7th: Netanyahu was also asked why he had not established a National Committee of Inquiry to learn the lessons from the events of October 7th, as was done following the Yom Kippur War and other national fiascos. Netanyahu claimed that much of the country does not have confidence in this process. Really? The truth is that less than a month ago, Channel 12 News conducted a survey and found that 79 percent of Israelis support a State Commission while only 8 percent opposed it. Another study by the Israel Institute for Democracy reported an astonishing 90% level of support.

Crying Wolf

Netanyahu’s tendency to lie is nothing new and surely has not been lost on his colleagues. His own political allies are open about the Prime Minister’s casual relationship with the truth. In 2022, in a closed presentation when he was unaware of being recorded, current Finance Minister, Bezalel Smotrich, called the Prime Minister a “liar – son of a liar”. Netanyahu, of course, is notorious for not keeping promises. The leadership of the Blue and White party learned the hard way during the COVID-19 crisis when Bibi blatantly disregarded solemn power-sharing commitments made to form a government. Bibi was characteristically cavalier in denying that they were ever made at all. Indeed, with the super-sycophantic support of Channel 14, an army of bots, social media warriors and right-wing websites, Netanyahu knew well how easy it is to create an alternative reality. The feeling of betrayal among those suffering from the Prime Minister’s habitual deceit has been compared to the fury caused by chronic infidelity.

To be fair, backtracking on agreements is something politicians everywhere have done since time immemorial. The difference is in the frequency and virulence of the chicanery. In what may be an apocryphal anecdote, Israel’s third Prime Minister, Levi Eshkol was said to have famously joked: “I did promise – but I didn’t promise to keep my promise.” Reality can be dynamic and sometimes circumstances force leaders to abandon earlier commitments.

The relentless disinformation and Netanyahu’s outright denial that promises were ever made create a “crying wolf” dynamic. The public never knows whether it should believe its Prime Minister or not. This has led to a profound crisis of confidence throughout the long hostage crisis. For example, Israel’s former Defense Minister, Likud MK Yoav Galant, went public in his belief that despite Netanyahu’s claims, Bibi has not done everything he can to expedite a hostage release deal.

The Loss of Trust

It wasn’t always like this. The son of a vaunted history professor, equipped with a master’s degree from MIT, Netanyahu began his career as something of an intellectual. Having gone the distance reading Bib’s 700-page autobiography, I found it fascinating to observe how, over time, Bibi’s perception of reality became either very warped or simply fictitious. For instance, I had to reread the passage where Netanyahu claimed that American opinion polls showed that his speech in Congress — where he publicly snubbed President Obama — actually improved Israel’s standing among Democratic voters. That’s curious. Last I checked, 71% of Democratic voters had no or “not too much” confidence in Israel’s Prime Minister.

There are a few, famous, “folksy” criteria for selecting political leaders. I have always preferred “Who would you want to buy a used car from?” over “Who would you want to have a beer with?” I’m not sure if there is a single Knesset member who would honestly prefer to buy a used car from Prime Minister Netanyahu rather than from his political rivals. Over the next several months we will be hearing the Prime Minister on the witness stand, testifying under oath about his behavior. Presumably, if Netanyahu invents facts as a witness in court and the prosecution can prove it, he can be indicted for perjury. So, we may get a little respite in disinformation. Yet, the real consequence for the Israeli public after years of habitual dishonesty is far more damaging.

If we are ever to attain some semblance of national unity, citizens from across the political spectrum must, at the very least, agree on basic facts. This is practically impossible when the Prime Minister insists on manufacturing his own – perpetuating the divisiveness that keeps him in power. In the meantime, an entire generation of political leadership is absorbing a pernicious lesson about the unbearable lightness of truth.