Wednesday, February 28, 2018

Why Israel loves Trump



  • In the 14 months since President Trump's inauguration, U.S. policy toward Israel has undergone a pronounced shift. He announced that the U.S. accepts Jerusalem as Israel's capital and has declared his intention to build a new U.S. Embassy in Jerusalem, first mandated by U.S. law in 1996.
  • America's ambassador to the UN has not only spoken out on Israel's behalf forcefully and repeatedly; Nikki Haley has also led the way in cutting the U.S. stipend to the refugee relief agency that is an effective front for the Palestinian terror state in Gaza. Vice President Pence traveled to Israel in January and delivered the most pro-Zionist speech any major American politician has ever given.
  • Part of this shift can also be seen in what the president has not done. He has not signaled that the U.S. views Israeli actions in Gaza and the West Bank as injurious to a future peace. And his administration has not complained about Israeli actions taken in self-defense in Lebanon and Syria, but has, instead, supported Israel's right to defend itself.
  • The things the president both has and has not done should constitute the baseline of what we ought to expect one ally would say and not say about the behavior of another ally. Yet so-called realists have spent the past seven decades whispering in the ears of America's leaders that they have the right to expect Israel to do things we would not expect of another ally and to demand it behave in ways we would not demand of any other friendly country.
  • The administration is seeing how the government of Egypt under President Sisi is making common cause with Israel against the Hamas entity in Gaza and against ISIS forces in Sinai. It is witness to the effort at radical reformation in Saudi Arabia under Muhammad bin-Salman - and how that seems to be going hand-in-hand with an astonishing new concord with Israel over the common threat from Iran.
  • Mostly, the U.S. is seeing that an ally is an ally. Israel's intelligence agencies are providing the kind of information America cannot get on its own about Syria and Iran and the threat from ISIS. Moreover, Israel is a technological powerhouse whose innovations are already helping to revolutionize American military know-how.

We tried Democratic way for 8 years=DISASTER!!!

We tried Democratic way for 8 years=DISASTER!!! Are Democrats stupid, misinformed, or just evil?
8 years of Obama=1. record poverty, 2. doubled all previous debt 3.worst ever economic pathetic growth over 8 years 4. Collapsing Obamacare sold on lies, 5. all our enemies and adversaries flourished ( Iran, Al Quida, Isis, N Korea, China, Russia) 6. Coddled dictators (Cuba, Venezuela, Turkey), 7. gutted our military 8.used IRS to abuse pro-Israel and conservative groups 9. Corrupted Justice Dept. (Loretta Lynch meets with Bill Clinton) 10.Israel backstabbed repeatedly 10.race riots erupt regularly 11. Killing of police escalate 12.massive illegal immigration 13. one million new Shariah supporting Muslims, 14. Record anti-Semitism on college campuses from Obama’s Muslims 15.  record business killing regulations 16. Iran strengthens terrorist efforts vs Israel thanks to Obamadollars. 16. Blacks suffered in every category under Obama.17. Obama dismisses Romney’s concerns about Russia, Obama tells Medvedev he’ll be “more flexible”. Obama does nothing as Russia invades Ukraine and helps Iran in Syria.  18. Appoints radical leftists to federal courts.
Total DISASTER. 
https://www.facebook.com/JonathanGinsb/videos/10155054018720837/
How Democrats follow Nazi agenda, wittingly or unwittingly 11 ways:  http://strongandresolute.blogspot.com/2018/02/8-examples-of-how-democrats.html
Meanwhile Trump’s first year amazing success.
1.     Poverty down. 2. Tax cut and massive deregulation leads to economic growth improvement. 3. Massive increase to rebuild gutted military 4. Black unemployment record low 5.  Hispanic unemployment record low.
6. Jerusalem recognized as capital of Israel.. Trump rock star in Israel. 7. Consumer confidence at 17 year high. 8. Stock market record after record. 9. U.S. filings for unemployment benefits plummeted to the lowest level in almost 45 years. 10. Small-business confidence hit a record high in 2017,
11. The Trump administration announced Dec. 29 that the United States will deny Pakistan military aid amounting to $255 million. A spokesman for the National Security Council explained that President Trump “has made clear that the United States expects Pakistan to take decisive action against terrorists and militants on its soil” 12. Wipes out Isis in Middle east in 3 weeks after Obama failed in 8 years. 13. Fastest cutting of business killing regulations ever
Dozens and dozens more great accomplishments already. http://www.wnd.com/2018/02/4621979/


Thursday, February 22, 2018

11 examples of how Democrats increasingly like the Nazis. Facist anti semites

11 Examples of how Democrats, wittingly or unwittingly, advance the goals of the the Nazis agenda.
1. Many Palestinians want Jews dead. Democrats support Palestinians over Israel 3-1
2. IRAN wants Israel destroyed and jews killed. Obama and Dems  helped them immensely
3. Nazis were socialists as are Democrats
4. Dems love Obama who committed most ANTI-SEMITIC ACT in the world
5. Racial bigotry. Destroying Blacks
6. Democrats want to destroy free speech
7. Democrats advocating violence against opponents
8. Dems cherish virulent anti-Semites
9. Explicit influence by Nazis on US Left
10.. Hitler insisted on confiscation of all guns, leaving Jews defenseless. Today's democrat agenda is gun confiscation.
11. Corrupt state organs for their nefarious purposes.
1. Many Palestinians want Jews dead. Democrats support Palestinians over Israel 3-1. Hamas explicitly calls for killing of all Jews and destroying Israel. 80% Palestinians support violence. Deep Palestinian ties to Hitler. https://www.haaretz.com/…/MAGAZINE-revealed-photos-of-pales…
2. IRAN wants Israel destroyed and jews killed. Obama and Dems  helped them immensely. 52/54 Dem. Senators supported Obama’s genocidal Iran deal, which uses Obamadollars to become world’s greatest financer of Islamic terror. Iran daily announces is intention to exterminate 7 million Jews in Israel and has Israel surrounded now. They are intensifying their war vs Israel. Obama sent secret emissaries to mullahs in 2008 promising them then great deal if he got elected. Democrats have aided and abetted a regime that seeks the extermination of 7 million Jews.
3. Nazis were socialists as are Democrats. Democrats are increasingly embracing socialism, (Bernie sanders/Elizabeth Warren) which is the disease that destroyed once wealthy Venezuela and has people eating their pets now. Nazi-National Socialists.
4. Dems love Obama who committed most ANTI-SEMITIC ACT in the world in 2016 according to the Simon Wiesenthal Institute of Nazi hunters with his UN abstention on the way out the door.
5. Destroying Blacks: Like Nazis, always hated Blacks. Backs suffered in every measurable category under 8 years of Obama. Every slave was owned by Democrats. KKK was 100% Dem. They resisted every civil rights bill and amendment. Planned Parenthood was started by Democrat for the purpose of killing Back babies. Now Democrats control inner cities, and promoted welfare, which are modern day plantations and have destroyed the Black family and led to 6 generations of welfare dependency, massive Black deaths by other Blacks. Many race riots, urged on by Al Sharpton after dozens of White House visits occurred under Obama. Racial tension massive surge. TRUMP: record LOW Black unemployment achieved in just one year.
6. Democrats want to destroy free speech for those who disagree with them. Continuing efforts on campuses, stop talk radio, disrupt rallies, threaten harm.
7. Democrats advocating violence against opponents. Bernie Sanders supporter shoots up Republican Congressman playing baseball. Averted a massacre only because on DC police. Democratic Hollywood starts regularly suggest violence coup, beheading, rape, blowing up White House to destroy Trump family. The party is increasingly embracing violence as tactic. Evil Leading Democrats continue to spew VIOLENT retoric about Trump. Sen. Kamala Harris (D-CA), in an appearance on The Ellen Show on Thursday, joked about killing President Trump, Vice President Mike Pence, or Attorney General Jeff Sessions.

Host Ellen DeGeneres asked Harris, “If you had to be stuck on an elevator with either President Trump, Mike Pence, or Jeff Sessions, who would it be?”

The California senator paused before answering the question.

“Does one of us have to come out alive?” she responded, cracking up at her own joke.

She did not answer the original question.

8. Dems cherish virulent anti-Semites. Pictures of smiling Obama and Farakhan, Obama’s minister Jew hating Jeremiah Wright, Keith Ellison elected VP of DNC, Linda Sarsour leads Women’s march despite virulent jew hatred, Obama dining with Rashid Khalidi and Edward Said
as well as Dems embrace Blacklivesmatter which embraces islamic terror groups.
9. Explicit influence by Nazis on US Left.  see https://www.amazon.com/Big-Lie-Exposing-Roots-…/…/1621573486

10. Hitler insisted on confiscation of all guns, leaving Jews defenseless. Today's democrat agenda is gun confiscation.
12. more on Raw Anti Semitism.
Caroline Glick  "Which brings us to the Democratic Party.
Corbyn’s statement recalled a statement then-Senator Barack Obama (D-IL) made during the 2008 presidential campaign.
“There is a strain within the pro-Israel community that says unless you adopt an unwavering pro-Likud approach to Israel that you’re anti-Israel,” Obama told an audience in Ohio.
Likud is Israel’s ruling party. It won the last three elections. By insinuating that Likud is illegitimate, Obama rejected the legitimacy of Israelis who elect Likud to lead them.
In addition, during the 2008 election and throughout his presidency, Obama diligently obfuscated his associations with antisemites.
Consider his relationship with Nation of Islam leader Louis Farrakhan.
Farrakhan is the most prominent and politically powerful antisemite in America.
He has a four-decade record of viciously antisemitic statements along the lines of the posts at the Palestine Live Facebook group. He has called Hitler “a very great man.” He has referred to Judaism as “a gutter religion,” and to Jews as “satanic.” He accused “Jews” of perpetrating the 9/11 attacks.
For Farrakhan, anti-Jewish bigotry has never been a bug in an otherwise wonderful system. Jew hatred has been a central feature of his public life.
During a Democratic primary debate in 2008, moderator Tim Russert asked Obama to comment on the fact that a few days before the debate, Farrakhan endorsed him at a Nation of Islam convention. Referring to Farrakhan respectfully as “Minister Farrakhan,” Obama said dryly, “I have been very clear in my denunciation of Minister Farrakhan’s anti-Semitic comments.”
He added, “I have consistently distanced myself from him.”
When Russert asked him if he rejected Farrakhan’s support, Obama demurred.
“I did not solicit his support. But I can’t say to somebody that he can’t say that he thinks I’m a good guy,” Obama said.
Obama’s relationship with Farrakhan returned to the news in January when photo-journalist Askia Muhammad published a photograph he took of the two men together at a 2005 Congressional Black Caucus (CBC) meeting when Obama was a serving U.S. Senator.
Askia told a reporter that the CBC asked him to hide it.
“I gave the picture up at the time and basically swore secrecy,” to prevent Obama’s association with Farrakhan from harming his future presidential prospects, Askia explained.
“After the nomination was secured and all the way up until the inauguration: then for eight years after he was President, it was kept under cover.”
Rather than disavowing Farrakhan, after Askia’s photograph was published, leading African American lawmakers have embraced him.
Representative Danny Davis (D-IL) told the Daily Caller that Farrakhan is “an outstanding human being.”
Davis explained that in Chicago, Farrakhan is not a fringe figure.
“I don’t regard Louis Farrakhan as an aberration or anything. I regard him as an outstanding human being who commands a following of individuals who are learned and articulate and he plays a big role in the lives of thousands and thousands and thousands and thousands of people.”
As for Farrakhan’s hatred of Jews, “That’s just one segment of what goes on in our world. The world is so much bigger than Farrakhan and the Jewish question and his position on that and so forth.”
A week before Davis called him an “outstanding,” mainstream leader, Farrakhan gave a virulently antisemitic sermon at the Nation of Islam’s Saviors’ Day celebration. He referred to Jews as “satanic” and said, “powerful Jews are my enemies.”
Like the members of Palestine Live Facebook page, Farrakhan promoted the conspiracy theory that Jews control Hollywood and the U.S. government, including the FBI. And the U.S. isn’t the only country controlled by “Satanic Jews”: Poland, Ukraine, France, Germany and Mexico are also controlled by Jews who “take on the culture, the money, the business,” of those countries, he said.
Farrakhan also gave a shout out to Tamika Mallory, one of the leaders of the Women’s March, among the most important organizing forces in the Democratic Party today.
As the Anti-Defamation League noted, “Mallory posted two Instagram photos from the event, which Carmen Perez, another Women’s March organizer, commented on with ‘raise the roof’ emojis.”
Mallory referred to Farrakhan as the “GOAT,” or “Greatest of All Time,” on her Instagram page. Her co-chairs, Perez and Linda Sarsour, have both expressed admiration for Farrakhan. After his statements at the Saviors’ Day sermon gained wide exposure, the Women’s March put out a boilerplate condemnation of racism without mentioning Farrakhan.
Daily Caller Associate Editor Peter Hasson reported that seven Democratic Congressman have held multiple meetings with Farrakhan. And Democratic National Committee Vice-Chairman Rep. Keith Ellison (D-MN) is one of them. Like then presidential candidate Obama in 2008, Ellison made light of his relationship with Farrakhan and the Nation of Islam when he first ran for Congress in 2006 and during his campaign for DNC Chair in 2016.
None of the 21 Democratic lawmakers who were present at the 2005 CBC meeting with Farrakhan that Obama attended in 2005 responded to Hasson’s request to denounce Farrakhan.
Indeed, far from denouncing him, the CBC has denounced his Jewish critics, and Israel.
When Rep. Andre Carson (D-IN) was questioned about his association with Farrakhan, he attacked Israel and the Republican Jewish Coalition (RJC), speaking in the name of the CBC.
The RJC called for Carson and the other Democratic lawmakers who met with Farrakhan to resign. But rather than apologize for embracing a man who applauds Hitler, Carson rejected the legitimacy of the RJC
“That organization doesn’t have any credibility with me,” he declared.
He continued, “The Congressional Black Caucus is asking that organization to condemn [Israeli Prime Minister] Benjamin Netanyahu and the [Israeli] government for discriminating against Africans who are migrating [to Israel], who are fleeing dictatorships, who are fleeing oppression. There’s a great deal of bigotry and racism happening right now they fail to condemn.”
(For factual information on Israel’s treatment of illegal immigration from Africa, see here.)
Republican National Committee Chairwoman Ronna McDaniel has asked DNC Chairman Tom Perez to address his party’s ties to Farrakhan “America’s leading anti-Semite.” To date, Perez has remained mum.
Then there is Obama’s consigliere, Valerie Jarrett. In an appearance on NBC’s The View, Jarrett tried to defend Mallory for her association with Farrakhan. Jarrett compared Mallory’s association with Farrakhan to her association with Rupert Murdoch and the Koch brothers, whom Jarrett met with during her tenure at the White House.
Which brings us back to Britain’s Labour party.
Like Corbyn, the Democrats have responded to the exposure of their close ties to the most powerful antisemite in the United States by deflecting the issue. They have drawn moral equivalences between Farrakhan and the government of Israel, and between Farrakhan and leading conservatives.
They have also embraced him as a “great man” who cannot be dismissed or rejected simply because he seeks the annihilation of the Jewish state of Israel, views the American Jewish community as his “enemy,” thinks the Holocaust was justified, and regards Hitler as a “very great man.”
Until he took over Labour, Corbyn was considered a fringe figure in the Labour party. Likewise, until recently, the Congressional Black Caucus was viewed as being on the leftist margins of the party. But as the forces of the far left have risen to positions of prominence in the party, the CBC has become a major player.
Ellison is not a fringe Democrat. He nearly won the election for DNC chair. His constituency is so large and committed that Perez made him Vice Chairman immediately after he was elected.
Collier’s damning report strengthens the growing sense that Britain’s Labour Party has already gone over the brink. Antisemitism is a central and undeniable rationale for its policies. As for the Democratic Party, it is still possible that the party’s rank-and-file will reject their leadership’s embrace of antisemitism through Farrakhan.
But with each passing day, it is becoming more difficult to imagine that happening.
Caroline Glick is a world-renowned journalist and commentator on the Middle East and U.S. foreign policy, and the author of The Israeli Solution: A One-State Plan for Peace in the Middle East. Read more at www.CarolineGlick.com.
11. Corrupt state organs for their nefarious purposes.

IRS  https://legalinsurrection.com/2017/10/irs-apologizes-for-targeting-conservative-groups/
Justice dept. https://www.cbsnews.com/news/president-bill-clinton-loretta-lynch-meet-on-tarmac-in-phoenix/   and http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2166192/House-votes-hold-Attorney-General-Eric-Holder-contempt-Congress-Fast-Furious-scandal.html

Now What is the FBI hiding?

Posted: 06 Apr 2018 04:17 AM PDT

(Scott Johnson)
In her weekly Wall Street Journal column tomorrow. Kim Strassel asks “What is the FBI hiding?” Her query is prompted by the resistance of the FBI to producing documents bearing on the synthetic Trump-Russia collusion scandal that has consumed the Trump administration since its inception.

Strassel notes that House Intelligence Chairman Devin Nunes has just sent another letter to Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein and FBI Director Christopher Wray to demand yet again that they comply with an August 2017 subpoena and hand over, among other things, the electronic communication—“EC” in investigative jargon—that officially kicked off the counterintelligence investigation. In his letter, Rep. Nunes states that the FBI has provided only a “heavily redacted” version of the EC. Beyond that, the FBI would prefer not to give it up.

Rep. Nunes is not amused. He writes: “On March 23, 2018, the FBI’s Assistant Director for Legislative Affairs informed the Committee that the FBI would refuse to further unredact the EC based on its supposed sensitivity. The document in question is not highly classified, and law enforcement sources have apparently not been shy about leaking to the press information that the Department and Bureau refuse to share with Congress.”

Thank you, Rep. Nunes.

Sara Carter has posted a PDF of the Nunes letter along with her story on it. I have uploaded it to Scribd and embedded it below.
Sources

Tuesday, February 20, 2018

Guns and schools

Posted: 20 Feb 2018 01:23 PM PST
(John Hinderaker)
"multiple bogus “statistics” about the frequency of school shootings have been peddled relentlessly. James Fox at USA Today does a good job of debunking them:
We were informed, for example, that since 2013 there has been an average of one school shooting a week in the U.S., and 18 since the beginning of this year. While these statistics were not exactly lies or fake news, they involved stretching the definition of a school shooting well beyond the limits of most people’s imagination.
***
Nearly half of the 290 were completed or attempted suicides, accidental discharges of a gun, or shootings with not a single individual being injured. Of the remainder, the vast majority involved either one fatality or none at all.
***
Since 1990, there have been 22 shootings at elementary and secondary schools in which two or more people were killed, not counting those perpetrators who committed suicide.
Whereas five of these incidents have occurred over the past five-plus years since 2013, claiming the lives of 27 victims (17 at Parkland), the latter half of the 1990s witnessed seven multiple-fatality shootings with a total of 33 killed (13 at Columbine).
In fact, the 1997-98 school year was so awful, with four multiple-fatality shooting sprees at the hands of armed students (in Pearl, Miss.; West Paducah, Ky.; Jonesboro, Ariz.; and Springfield, Ore.), that then-President Clinton formed a White House expert committee to advise him.
If better security is needed at public schools, let’s have better security. But I don’t see anyone on the Left talking about that, just as no one on the Left seems to be talking about failures of law enforcement or our mental health system.

Shocker: Many nations are breaking Paris accord promises

Posted: 20 Feb 2018 07:40 AM PST
(Paul Mirengoff)
My views on climate change deviate somewhat from those of John and Steve who, to be fair, know more about the subject than I do. So I might have favored remaining in the Paris Accord if I thought the rest of the world would comply with the promises made therein.
However, I had no such confidence. It seemed to me that only a fool would.
Now we learn that in the years since the global agreement was reached, world-wide emissions of carbon dioxide are rising after several years of remaining flat, as many nations, including some very big ones, are failing to fulfill the promises they made. The problem hasn’t been the U.S., where emissions have declined since the Paris agreement, according to the Washington Post. The problem has been with much of the rest of the world. The Post explains:
Even as renewable energy grows cheaper and automakers churn out battery-powered and more efficient cars, many nations around the world are nonetheless struggling to hit the relatively modest goals set in Paris.
The reasons vary. Brazil has struggled to rein in deforestation, which fuels greenhouse gas emissions. In Turkey, Indonesia and other countries with growing economies, new coal plants are being planned to meet the demand for electricity.
Now there’s a surprise — countries with growing economies will use coal plants, not wind and other trendy sources, to meet electricity demand.
What about countries with highly developed economies?
The struggles of Germany, one of the globe’s most progressive nations when it comes to embracing renewable energy, illustrates the problem.
The country’s “Energiewende,” or “energy transition,” aims to generate 80 percent of energy from renewable sources by 2050. The country also has set an aggressive near-term goal of cutting greenhouses gas emissions by 40 percent below 1990 levels by the year 2020.
But Germany is struggling to meet its goals. The county’s emissions actually rose slightly in 2015 and 2016 because of continued coal burning and emissions growth in the transportation sector. That failing trajectory won’t change without “massive and rapid efforts,” according to the German Environment Agency.
Indeed, the entire E.U. is on track to fall short of promised reductions, according to the European Environment Agency. So are Japan and Australia. Mexico and South Africa are among the nations who, according to the Climate Action Tracker, are guilty both of promising insufficient reductions and of failing to meet even those promises.
But help is on the way:
This year, countries will officially begin to grapple with how off target they are through the “Talanoa dialogue,” which refers to a process used in Fiji and other Pacific islands for finding consensus and building trust without laying blame. Culminating at the December U.N. meeting in Poland, the dialogue will nudge world leaders to assess where they stand on the need to cut emissions and how far they have to go.
If that doesn’t work, there’s always a witch doctor.

Wednesday, February 14, 2018

Netanyahu’s chief political rival is the key witness against him

Netanyahu’s chief political rival is the key witness against him

Caroline Glick, whose voice I trust, thinks the charges vs Bibi are from Israel's Deep Statde and are bogus.
Caroline Glick: Israel’s ‘Deep State’ Targets Netanyahu with Bogus Charges

by CAROLINE GLICK13 Feb 20184,124

The Israeli police investigation against Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu shows remarkable similarities with the Special Counsel probe against President Donald Trump in the United States.
During the prime time news broadcasts Tuesday evening in Israel, the dramatic news was announced that Israel Police investigators are recommending that Israel’s Attorney General, Avichai Mandelblit, indict Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu on bribery and breach of trust charges in two investigations.

The news raises a number of obvious questions about Netanyahu’s political future. But it also raises an equal, if not greater, number of questions about the purity of the police service’s intentions and its trustworthiness.

Let us begin by considering the specific cases that form the bases of police recommendations against Netanyahu.

The first investigation has been dubbed Investigation 1000 by the Police’s main criminal investigations unit, Lahav 433. The investigation surrounds the relationship between Netanyahu and his old friend, Israeli businessman and Hollywood movie producer Arnon Milchen. The police have recommended that Milchen be indicted for paying bribes to Netanyahu. The police recommend indicting Netanyahu for taking bribes from Milchen and acting illegally on his behalf.

According to Israel’s Hadashot television news, this investigation was the top story in terms of volume of coverage during 2017.

The police allege that between 2007 and 2016, Milchen showered Netanyahu and his wife Sara with cigars, champagne, and jewelry, often purchased at their request. In 2014, Milchen’s business partner, Australian businessman James Packer, who was also a friend of Netanyahu and his family, allegedly began giving similar gifts to the Netanyahu family.

In exchange for those gifts, the police allege that Netanyahu supported extending a law passed in 2008, when Netanyahu was the head of the parliamentary opposition, that gave returning Israeli expatriates a ten year exemption on income earned abroad and a ten year exemption for reporting income earned abroad.

According to the police, after Netanyahu returned to office in 2009, Milchen lobbied Netanyahu’s finance minister at the time, Yair Lapid, to extend the tax and reporting exemption period from ten to twenty years. Lapid, who is now in the opposition, heads the center-left Yesh Atid party. If Netanyahu’s Likud party fails to win the next election, according to the polls, Lapid and his Yesh Atid party will form the next government.

In other words, today, Lapid is Netanyahu’s chief political rival.

On Tuesday, the police told reporters that Lapid is the key witness against Netanyahu in Investigation 1000.

In other words, Netanyahu’s chief political rival is the key witness against him.

Lapid reportedly told investigators that Netanyahu asked him twice to advance Milchen’s request to extend the period of tax and reporting exemptions for returning expatriates and new immigrants. Lapid and the finance ministry opposed Milchen’s proposal and his initiative went nowhere.

According to the Times of Israel, the law has been harshly criticized by Israel’s State Comptroller and foreign governments — including the U.S. State Department — who view it as a means to facilitate money laundering. At the same time, in part due to the law, Israel has been able to attract a high volume of very wealthy immigrants, which benefits society.

Netanyahu also allegedly intervened on behalf of Milchen in two proposed deals related to Israeli television stations that Milchen either owned or wished to own.

But then, neither of his proposed interventions, if they occurred, were successful.

The police report that Netanyahu intervened on Milchen’s behalf when the latter was experiencing difficulty renewing his residency visa in the U.S. Netanyahu called then-Secretary of State John Kerry and asked him to intervene on Milchen’s behalf to renew his residency visa.

Since Milchen stood to lose a significant amount of money if he was unable to remain in the U.S., the police claim that Netanyahu’s intervention on his behalf with Kerry represented the return on Milchen’s gifts.

Milchen himself has a long record of service to Israel’s Mossad — its foreign spy service — and reportedly has contributed significantly to Israel’s defense. Netanyahu claims that he acted out of respect for Milchen’s long service to Israel’s security. In addition,, Israel’s late president and prime minister, left-wing icon Shimon Peres, also intervened on Milchen’s behalf with U.S. authorities.

In the second probe, dubbed Investigation 2000, the police recommend indicting Netanyahu following a discussion he held – and recorded surreptitiously – in 2014 with Arnon Mozes, the publisher and controlling owner of Israel’s mass circulation daily, Yediot Ahronot. The police found the recorded conversation on the mobile phone of Netanyahu’s former chief of staff, Ari Harow, who is the subject of a separate and unrelated influence-peddling probe. Netanyahu claims he recorded their conversation on the advice of his attorney because he was afraid that Mozes would try to extort him.

The police claim that the conversation is proof that Mozes offered Netanyahu a bribe and that Netanyahu accepted the offer. They recommend charging Mozes with bribing Netanyahu, and charging Netanyahu with accepting a bribe from Mozes.

The odd thing about this claim is that no deal was struck. To the contrary.

Mozes is Netanyahu’s nemesis. Yediot Ahronot is the most influential newspaper in Israel. Its front page dictates the daily news programming for radio and television broadcasts. And Yediot Ahronot‘s coverage of Netanyahu is implacably hostile to the premier and to his family. To a lesser but significant degree, Yediot Ahronot is also deeply hostile to the Israeli political right.

According to the recording of the men’s conversation, which was leaked to the media by the police more than a year ago, Netanyahu and Mozes discussed an elaborate scheme to change the newspaper market in Israel in Yediot Ahronot‘s favor.

Israel’s largest circulation paper is Israel Hayom, a free tabloid that is owned by conservative American billionaire — and Netanyahu supporter — Sheldon Adelson. In their recorded conversation, Mozes raised the possibility of Netanyahu curtailing government advertising in Israel Hayom and working to cut back its circulation in order to increase Yediot Ahronot‘s market share.

In exchange, Mozes offered to scale back the negative tone of his paper’s coverage of Netanyahu.

In the event, nothing came of the conversation. Indeed, in late 2014, against Netanyahu’s expressed wishes, then-justice minister Tzipi Livni put forward a controversial media bill, which was based on a legal opinion written by Yediot Ahronot‘s legal advisor. The bill, which was dubbed the “Israel Hayom law,” would have forced the shutdown of the paper by barring its owners from not charging money for it.

The law passed a preliminary reading in the Knesset with 43 votes. Netanyahu and his Likud Party voted against the bill. Moreover, to prevent the bill from going forward, Netanyahu disbanded his government and the Knesset and called new elections a bit more than a year into his term.

In other words, to prevent any harm to Israel Hayom – and transitively, to prevent any advantage from being accrued to Yediot Ahronot — Netanyahu took the radical step of standing for election again.

For more than a year, the police refused to investigate any of the 43 lawmakers who voted in favor of the bill, or to analyze the coverage they received in Yediot Ahronot in following their support. Three weeks ago, the bill’s sponsor, Labor Party member of Knesset Eitan Cabel — who enjoyed extraordinary coverage in the paper — was brought in for a brief interview.

In other words, the police are recommending that Netanyahu be indicted for a conversation that went nowhere, which he recorded. And the police are not investigating 42 out of the 43 lawmakers that supported a move that would have given Mozes everything he asked Netanyahu for, but didn’t receive, while the 43rd lawmaker was subject merely to a brief interrogation.

This brings us to the police.

Since Netanyahu served his first term as prime minister from 1996 until 1999, he and his wife Sara have been the subjects of 19 police probes and or investigations. The Hebrew language website Mida.org.il has published a review of all of them earlier this month.

The police recommended indicting the Netanyahus in three probes in 1999. The attorney general rejected their requests.

In January 2017, the attorney general closed four probes of Netanyahu that had been ongoing since 2009.

In September 2017, the attorney general closed six police probes against Sara Netanyahu, which the police had opened in 2015. One probe, relating to an administrative, rather than criminal, charge that Mrs. Netanyahu ordered food from restaurants instead of using the services of the cook at the prime minister’s residence, is still under review.

Two other probes, related to accusations that a French businessman gave Netanyahu illegal campaign contributions, and that the Likud overpaid a secretary in the U.S., disappeared after leading the headlines for several news cycles in 2016.

Of the three open cases, the Milchen and Mozes investigations led to Tuesday night’s announcement of the police’s recommendations. A third investigation, of influence-peddling related to Israel’s purchase of submarines from Germany, is unrelated to Netanyahu, but since his associates are under investigation, his name was dragged into the discourse related to the probe.

The endless stream of criminal investigations against Netanyahu has involved investigating witnesses across the globe, and has cost tens of millions of shekels to Israeli taxpayers.

At the end of this long, 22-year road, what we have are just two charges — which, if anything, show that Netanyahu is probably most worthless bribe-taker in history. Aside from assistance with his residency visa in the U.S., Netanyahu provided Milchen with no meaningful support in any of his endeavors. The one piece of legislation that passed, the law that entitles new immigrants and returning Israeli expatriates to a ten year exemption on income taxes and reporting requirements for income earned abroad, passed when Netanyahu was out of office.

Over the past eight years of Netanyahu’s tenure as prime minister, none of Milchen’s proposals in either the media market or tax laws was advanced even slightly.

As for Investigation 2000, it is almost impossible to understand the basis for the charge against Netanyahu. Mozes apparently offered him a bribe, in the form of diminished hostility in his newspaper in exchange for a larger market share for Yediot Ahronot. But Netanyahu did nothing to advance his offer. To the contrary, he preferred new elections to curtailing Israel Hayom‘s operation.

Over the past year, as the police investigations dragged on, investigators fed the media with a never-ending stream of negative leaks that all disparaged and vilified Netanyahu.

The police campaign against Netanyahu reached its peak last Wednesday night. Police Commissioner Roni Alscheich, whom Netanyahu appointed in 2015, gave an hour-long interview on Israel’s leading television magazine Uvda, or “Fact.”

Alscheich claimed that Netanyahu was behind three separate, arguably felonious conspiracies against the police. Netanyahu, he alleged, had arranged for private detectives to “sniff around” the families of his investigators to try to find dirt on them.

Netanyahu, he claimed, conspired with a female police officer who in 2011 brought sexual harassment charges against her commander, Police Superintendent Roni Reitman, the head of Lahav 433, the unit responsible for investigating Netanyahu. Alsheich claimed that Netanyahu was behind the police officer’s decision to petition Israel’s Supreme Court against Reitman after the Attorney General chose to close the investigation against him without indicting him in 2015, due to the passage of time since his alleged acts of harassment took place.

Alsheich also claimed that Netanyahu had offered himself a sort of bribe. The Commission of Police alleged that when Netanyahu appointed him to serve as police chief, Netanyahu knew that Alsheich really wanted to serve as Director of the Israel Security Agency, where he was serving as deputy director when Netanyahu asked him to take over the police. Netanyahu, Alsheich alleged, told him that if Netanyahu was still prime minister when Alsheich finished his tour of duty, Netanyahu would appoint him the head of the Israel Security Agency.

Even the police’s most fervent media supporters were aghast at Alsheich’s allegations – coupled with the fact that he has refused to investigate any of them. To summarize: just as the police were set to announce their recommendations, Alsheich made clear that he has a personal vendetta against Netanyahu and is prepared to overthrow his government.

Alsheich’s wild charges that Netanyahu was actively conspiring against his investigators gave credence to the allegations of bias, verging on animus, leveled against the police by Netanyahu and his supporters.

And so the parallels between the indictment of Netanyahu and the witch hunt against President Trump are remarkable. But there is a key distinction.

The U.S. is governed by a constitution that places checks and balances on the executive that extend to the permanent bureaucracy. In Israel, there are no constitutional checks on the bureaucracy. The Knesset cannot compel civil servants to appear before its committees. It cannot force civil servants to testify under oath. It cannot hold them in contempt.

After his scandalous interview last week, Likud Party lawmakers requested that Alsheich come before the relevant committee and explain his charges against Netanyahu. Although he tentatively agreed to appear this week, on Tuesday night, reporters said that Alsheich has no intention of appearing before lawmakers to answer their questions.

Some commentators claimed on Tuesday night that the police deliberately threw every possible charge at Netanyahu to pressure the Attorney General into indicting him for something. The bias against Netanyahu that Alsheich revealed so extravagantly in his interview last Wednesday night, and the thousands of hours and tens of millions of shekels that the police have invested over the past 22 years in their endless pursuit of Netanyahu and his family, now stand in the balance.

If Netanyahu is cleared — and given the weakness of the charges against him, it’s hard to see how he can be indicted — then the police will lose their credibility and the public trust.

Then again, given that Israel’s elected officials have no oversight over the civil service, it could be that Alsheich and his officers don’t care.

Caroline Glick is a world-renowned journalist and commentator on the Middle East and U.S. foreign policy, and the author of The Israeli Solution: A One-State Plan for Peace in the Middle East.