A Tale of Two Affairs

Graphic included for purposes of titillation...

Gotcha!  From the title of this post, I'll bet you thought I was posting about sexual dalliances.  After all, that's probably the common American-English usage of the word 'affair.'  But it can also mean 'an event' as in "the charity dinner was a grand affair."  And it can also mean a regrettable chapter as in "the Dreyfus Affair."  This last usage corresponds to the Hebrew word 'parasha.'  Jews in the diaspora generally know the word 'parasha' as referring to the weekly Torah reading in the synagogue, as in "last week's parasha was 'Terumah' (ie, Exodus 25:1-27:19, which it was)."  But for Israelis, the more common use of the word parasha in public life is to mean 'an affair' as in 'a scandalous chapter.'

Both Israeli and American public consciousness have been riveted for the past year and more on investigations by special police units into the doings of their political leaders.  In Israel's case, the elite Lahav 433 investigative unit of the Israeli Police has been investigating charges of bribery and corruption against the country's head of government, Prime Minister Benjamin ("Bibi") Netanyahu.  In the case of the USA, a group within the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) headed by Special Counsel Robert Mueller (past director of the FBI), has been investigating charges that President Trump and his campaign, transition, and White House staff colluded with Russian nationals, possibly with the government of the Russian Federation, to influence the outcome of the 2016 US Presidential Election, ie, to secure a win for Trump and a loss for Hillary Clinton.  In both affairs, the investigators came out publicly last week with findings.

I'd like to take a moment to state a trio of remarkable parallels between the two men, Bibi and Trump.  

Both wield political power that is contraindicated by weaknesses within their respective political parties.  Never in the history of the modern State of Israel has a single party been able to form a government without some serious coalition building with other parties, but the number of seats held by Likud, Bibi's party, 30 in a Knesset of 120 seats, is an historic low by a ruling party.  Somewhat likewise, while the Republican party now holds a comfortable majority in the US House of Representatives with 248 seats as opposed to the Democrats' 187, they are weak in the US Senate with 51 seats as opposed to the Democrats' 49 (including two independents who caucus with their Democratic colleagues).  While 51 is a majority, in the Senate certain types of issues require 60 votes, plus there are several 'moderate' Republicans who do not reliably vote with their party colleagues.  So both Bibi in Israel and Trump in the USA, face difficulties in passing legislation.

Additionally, both men wield their power despite that they are considered deeply flawed by many voters, yet enjoy a great deal of personal support by voters who see no viable alternative.  In Israel, where there is really only one issue that matters in a general election - the security situation - no potential prime minister has the support of the electorate that Bibi enjoys, in terms of confidence that, come what may, he will be able to protect the nation in a time of war or conflict.  This explains in large part why he has clung to power over so many years, despite that everybody seems to have some beef with him and/or his party.  Trump is, of course, much newer to his office.  But he was elected, in part and as I've mentioned before, because enough voters thought his flaws were not as fatal as those of his opponent.  And, although it's early to say, it appears at this time that the Democrats are unlikely to find and put up against him in 2020, a candidate who can outshine him and stand out as a viable alternative.  That is, unless Trump were felled by a major scandal.

The final parallel:  both politicians, under fire by investigators and the press in their respective countries, claim that both organs are out to get them unfairly.

US President Trump and Special Counsel Robert Mueller

So the 'scandal' on which Trump's detractors have pinned their hopes for felling him, after well over a year in process, has so far revealed nothing that impugns the actions of Trump or those close to him.  Last week, Special Counsel Mueller announced indictments against 13 Russian nationals for interfering in the political process in the US.  But the charges made it clear that the nature of the interference detracted from both campaigns (Trump and Clinton) and has continued since the election, serving to interfere with overall governing process in the US, not just an election.  In other words, it appears that the Russians seem to be intent on general interference in US civic life, for the purposes of tying our general political process in knots and, presumably, lessening our ability to wield the power of state in international affairs where Russia has their own abiding interests that are counter to the US's.  In the indictments that Mueller announced last week, there was no mention of collusion with the Russians' efforts by anybody in Trump's circles.  The only indictment against a Trump adviser to date, is that against Michael Flynn, who briefly served as Trump's National Security and plead guilty for lying to the FBI about prior contacts with Russian officials.  Trump long ago fired Flynn for the same reason, lying about contacts with Russians, which served to embarrass Vice President Pence.  Another one-time Trump adviser, Paul Manafort, seems to have entered into an immunity deal to give evidence against Trump or unspecified members of his team - but since no charges against any of the above have been lodged, it would appear that Manafort had nothing to add to the investigation. 

Israeli PM Netanyahu and Attorney General Avichai Mendelblit

In the case of charges of corruption against Bibi, the public report by the police investigators last week was similarly anticlimactic in terms of what his detractors have been asserting that he's guilty of.  There are two individuals that he has been accused of bribing.  In one case, it is beyond dispute that Bibi accepted expensive gifts from several wealthy businessmen.  That's been public for a long time.  But on the other hand, the investigators have yet to tie those gifts to any legislative favors given in return for those gifts.  So yes, Bibi did accept some expensive Scotch and cigars from Hollywood producer Arnon Milchan - believe me, I'm jealous! - but it isn't clear that there was any quid pro quo.  The second of two cases against Bibi is more complicated.  in 2007 a new daily newspaper, Yisrael Hayom, started up and supplanted the position of Yediot Aharonot as the country's largest-circulation daily paper.  It achieved this by being circulated for free.  How could it be distributed free-of-charge?  The belief was that it was financed for this purpose with $50 million by US investor Sheldon Adelson, a strong supporter of Bibi, who created Yisrael Hayom in order to provide coverage sympathetic to Bibi in contrast to Yediot Aharonot, which is often critical towards the Prime Minister.  According to the investigators, Bibi offered Yediot Aharonot executive publisher Arnon Mozes to sponsor legislation forbidding Yisrael Hayom from being circulated free (on the grounds that it is unfair competition) in return to more sympathetic coverage.  Now whatever evidence there is, that this 'deal' took place, there are two irrefutable facts:  Yisrael Hayom is still being circulated free (alongside Yediot Aharonot, with 'dueling paperboys' trying to force both newspapers into the hands of commuters entering train stations every weekday morning), and Yediot Aharonot's coverage of Bibi is still far from sympathetic.

So despite exhaustive investigations by elite units that have stretched out over long periods of time, it remains to be seen that Trump is guilty of anything, or that Bibi is guilty of anything other than accepting some Scotch and cigars.

As to the third parallel I mentioned above, that both claim to be the target of a vast conspiracy to 'get' them.  In both cases, they have been accused of paranoia.  But that brings to mind the words of Joseph Heller in his novel, Catch 22:  Just because you're paranoid, doesn't mean they aren't out to get you.
  
And the beat goes on...