Election-interference investigation
An Israel Hayom analysis framed the dispute as a collision between fears of foreign electoral manipulation and political use of the Israel Security Agency (Shin Bet). It described the case as the most serious controversy surrounding Shin Bet chief Zini.
The article said the right views Attorney General Gali Baharav-Miara as acting like an opposition leader and obstructing the investigation, drawing a parallel with the Military Advocate General affair.
In its account, the opposition sees a Netanyahu-appointed security chief advancing a scandal fitting the prime minister’s narrative at an exceptionally sensitive moment.
Zini told Justice Solberg that general pre-election intelligence was followed at noon on Election Day by nationwide reports involving both Arab parties, including free fuel cards and offers of money for votes and family participation.
He used hypothetical Russian funding of Likud and poisoned water flowing from Mount Hermon to the Banias to argue against dismissing the allegations because individual polling stations could not be identified.
Israel Hayom reported Zini’s belief that Baharav-Miara was deliberately delaying the case for political reasons, contrasting this with his Election Day statement that the elections had been conducted properly.
It regarded Solberg’s legal position as sound: even if the allegations were accurate, insufficient specific polling stations could be identified for invalidation.
The analysis considered the allegations deeply disturbing but accepted Baharav-Miara’s concern about proposed Shin Bet measures not previously used, or not since the service acted against political opponents under David Ben-Gurion.
It contrasted alleged foreign manipulation with fears that a service led by an outsider appointed by a rival party’s leader threatened democracy.
It said Baharav-Miara had accumulated distrust, whether fairly or through her own conduct, citing years of delays involving opposition figures, including Gilad Kariv, versus unusually forceful action affecting the government.
It also argued her objections to political investigations were less forceful when Ben-Gvir’s office was involved.
Israel Hayom criticized Likud and Netanyahu for not accepting that they had not won, arguing their defeatist response could help a problematic minority government form.
It said even opposing national-unity advocates saw efforts to undermine the results, with Shin Bet conduct worsening concerns.
It urged accepting the results, fully investigating and pursuing unity, citing the attorney general and Shin Bet chief’s joint statement earlier that week as evidence cooperation remained possible.
The head of the Police Investigations Division ordered personnel to obtain divisional approval before giving the Shin Bet any election-related assistance, including retrieving security footage or conducting investigations.
On Radio 103FM, Itamar Ben-Gvir alleged that Baharav-Miara was blackmailing the police commissioner over alleged building violations at his home and claimed she screams at him in meetings.
Unity appeals and the Joint List’s position
Netanyahu called for unity. Segal reported conditions including dismantling Netanyahu’s bloc and forming a government under Eisenkot.
Israel Katz linked his unity appeal to a serious Iranian threat and said Israel was more determined than ever to take preemptive action.
Asked about Hamas, Joint List candidate Dr. Faten Ghattas told the BBC that occupation produces resistance and international law permits occupied peoples to resist.
He rejected characterizing a government including his party as terrorist and accused the current government of severe terrorism against “us as citizens” and of terrorism in the occupied territories.
