Podcast Summary

Episode Overview

Podcast: Call Me Back - with Dan Senor
Episode: "Netanyahu Seeks Pardon" — with Amit Segal and Nadav Eyal
Date: December 1, 2025
Description:
An in-depth discussion on Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s formal request for a presidential pardon in his long-running corruption trial, the unprecedented political and legal implications of such a move, and how this development reflects and impacts Israeli society and politics. Dan Senor is joined by Israeli journalists Amit Segal and Nadav Eyal.

Main Theme

The episode dives into Netanyahu’s unprecedented request for a presidential pardon while still in office, examining its legal, political, and societal ramifications. Central to the episode are the stakes for Israeli democracy, the legacy of the country’s leadership, and the deep divisions this moment illustrates.

Key Discussion Points and Insights

1. Netanyahu's Pardon Request: What Does It Mean?

• Background:

  • On Nov 30, 2025, Netanyahu formally requested a pardon from President Isaac Herzog regarding his ongoing corruption trial ([00:50]-[03:00]).
  • The request was made via a lengthy letter by his lawyer, stressing the need to "mend rifts" in society and claiming a pardon would let him focus on national interests. It notably contained no apology, admission of guilt, or promise to step down from politics ([00:50]-[01:50]).
  • Context: The request comes shortly after former President Trump publicly called for the same ([01:20]).

• Legal Nuance:

  • Nadav Eyal elaborates that Netanyahu’s personal letter to the president doesn’t directly ask for a pardon or amnesty—these terms are omitted. Instead, it hints the judicial overhaul would be dropped if the legal case disappears, suggesting the overhaul was a bargaining chip ([02:56]-[04:45]).
    • Quote:

      “If you close the case against me … the judicial overhaul is over and done with.” — Nadav Eyal ([03:30])

• Negotiation Dynamics:

  • Amit Segal argues this is a shift from earlier stages of the trial, where resignation might have traded for clemency. Now Netanyahu seeks a pardon without admission, apology, or leaving office—testing Israeli political culture ([04:54]-[07:01]).
    • Quote:

      “Maybe the condition would be, let’s set a date for your resignation. Let’s end this discourse and fights about the judicial reform. That’s why I think that Herzog’s response would be: ‘yes, but…’” — Amit Segal ([06:34])

2. Presidential Powers and Israeli Precedents

• Herzog’s Constitutional Role:

  • The president can pardon “offenders”—those convicted or who admit guilt. There’s ambiguity if this applies to ongoing trials, but precedent exists ([07:21]-[08:17]).

• Historical Parallel: The Bus 300 Affair

  • In the 1980s, President Chaim Herzog (current president’s father) pardoned Shin Bet (security) officials before trial for actions in the Bus 300 affair, which the Supreme Court ultimately approved, believing prosecution would damage the country ([08:17]-[10:40]).
    • Memorable Moment:

      “Two cases in which the president from the Herzog family believed that the public interest demands ending the legal issue in order to save the country.” — Amit Segal ([09:30])

• Uniqueness of Netanyahu’s Case:

  • Israel has jailed former presidents and PMs for crimes (e.g., Olmert, Katzav), but a pardon for a sitting leader without resignation or admission is unprecedented ([11:19]-[13:18]).

3. Public, Political, and Legal Debate

• Is this a ‘Bargain’ for Judicial Reform?

  • Debate whether Netanyahu is using the case as leverage to kill judicial reforms (appeasing opposition) or, conversely, as leverage to sustain them for his supporters ([13:33]-[14:25]).
    • Quote:

      “Netanyahu is going on a very narrow bridge. He tries both to convince President Herzog to give him a pardon and … to convince his supporters from the right wing that he hadn’t given up any of his claims against the judicial reform.” — Amit Segal ([13:54])

• Legal Process and Delays:

  • Discussion about why the case is stalled for so long—blame on both Netanyahu’s delaying tactics and the prosecutors’ approach ([14:25]-[18:35]).
  • Amit claims the trial’s endlessness is tearing Israeli society apart, linking the national divide to security failures.
    • Quote:

      “I personally believe that the October 7 massacre emanated directly from the fight in Israel that rendered Israel’s political system … [into] a culture war, a religion war...” — Amit Segal ([17:05])

4. Comparison with Past Political Scandals

• Olmert, Rabin, and Others:

  • Contrast to ex-PM Olmert’s quick resignation under pressure, lack of loyal base, and eventual conviction. Rabin resigned over an illegal bank account with a trivial sum ([19:40]-[20:52]).
  • Netanyahu’s unique political base allows him to survive legal assaults much longer ([20:52]-[23:32]).

• Trial Strength:

  • Dan Senor raises doubts with Israeli legal experts about whether the cases are “slam dunks,” especially for removing a sitting PM ([22:17]-[23:32]).
  • Nadav notes at least one case ("Case 1000") has clear facts; others are less airtight.

• Prosecutorial Overreach?:

  • Amit argues the state erred in testing new legal precedent on a sitting PM, thus dragging the country into endless turmoil ([26:35]-[28:13]).

    • Quote:

      “You do not try to create legal precedents when it’s the Prime Minister, when you take the country for a rendezvous that might last for years.” — Amit Segal ([26:48])

5. How Netanyahu Polarizes Israeli Politics

• Why Won’t Other Parties Join Bibi?

  • Amit points to the “criminal investigations dividing line” since 2016 as the moment parties, even centrists like Gantz, refused to join Netanyahu, deepening societal cleavage ([32:46]-[33:41]).

• Nadav pushes back:

  • The opposition’s refusal to sit with Netanyahu is less about a “religion” and more voters simply having enough—a democratic mechanism ([35:12]-[37:05]).

    • Quote:

      “It’s not about a crusade about the man personally. It’s about the voters. They want to get elected and the voters don’t like him because he’s been there forever and… because he’s probably guilty, at least with some of the charges.” — Nadav Eyal ([37:35])

• Amit laments system breakdown:

  • The Netanyahu focus has sucked all ideological oxygen from politics, damaging both left and right and paralyzing alternatives ([38:33]-[40:33]).

6. Political Forecast: What Happens Next?

• Herzog’s Choice is Lose-Lose:

  • Nadav predicts that because Herzog cannot win with either choice—granting a pardon will appear like caving to Netanyahu, refusing will appear as persecution—Netanyahu will weaponize either outcome for political gain ([46:03]-[48:25]).
    • Quote:

      “It’s the tragedy of Bouji Herzog … he’s now faced with a binary choice…he’ll be immediately cast by half the country, probably more … as someone who caved into Netanyahu.” — Nadav Eyal ([46:03])

• Will This Shape the Next Election?

  • Both guests agree the issue will further entrench positions but may not change core political dynamics, as the Israeli divide is now less about substance and more about “yes Bibi / no Bibi” ([45:22]-[48:41]).
  • Nadav notes Netanyahu benefits from shifting discourse to his legal fight, away from unpopular moves (like the Ultra-Orthodox military exemption bill), and that this maneuver serves as “super glue” to his base ([40:42]-[43:28]).

Notable Quotes and Moments

• Netanyahu’s Gambit:

  “If you close the case against me … the judicial overhaul is over and done with.” — (Eyal summarizing Netanyahu's hint, [03:30])

• On Israeli Legal Precedent:

  "Those were two cases in which the president from the Herzog family believed that the public interest demands ending the legal issue in order to save the country.” — Amit Segal ([09:30])

• Amit on the price of endless trial:

  “We can’t allow ourselves as a country to actually reach to 2031 before we have the final verdict from the Supreme Court.” — Amit Segal ([16:10])

• Nadav on the opposition’s stance:

  "It’s not about a crusade about the man personally. … the voters don’t like him because he’s been there forever." ([37:35])

Timestamps for Important Segments

• Netanyahu’s Pardon Request Revealed: [00:50]–[04:45]
• Israel’s Pardon Precedent (Bus 300): [08:17]–[10:40]
• Why the Case Takes So Long: [14:25]–[18:35]
• Comparing Netanyahu, Olmert, Rabin: [19:40]–[23:32]
• Has the Trial Destroyed Politics? [38:33]–[40:33]
• Political Predictions & Herzog’s Dilemma: [40:33]–[48:25]

Conclusion

This episode provides a rare, behind-the-scenes look into how Netanyahu’s legal troubles are reshaping not only his own political prospects but the structure and cohesion of Israeli democracy. The discussion is vibrant, detailed, and reflects the deep divides — and the exhaustion — within Israeli society as the country faces yet another pivotal and uncharted political moment.

Panelists’ Final Thoughts:

• If President Herzog pardons Netanyahu, it will deepen divisions but may not break the political stalemate.
• If he refuses, Netanyahu could exploit this as further evidence of "the witch hunt" against him.
• Ultimately, this crossroads exposes the tension between Israel’s institutions, its rule of law, and the extraordinary staying power of its most polarizing leader.