Former Prime Minister Ehud Barak’s responses to former Prime Minister Ehud Olmert’s remarks reflect anxiety that if a police investigation does not find him guilty of bribery, it is liable to discover other things. This anxiety is logical for a person who made so much money so quickly.

What did Olmert seek to achieve by telling Shula Zaken his stories of bribery allegedly received by Barak? Probably nothing concrete. Perhaps it gave him a good feeling that he was not the only one; there is someone else who might be worse than he, or maybe it was just useless gossip with no particular purpose. On the other hand, maybe he really knows something. After all, Olmert is not just an ordinary criminal; he is also a lawyer, and it can be assumed that he gained a great deal of expertise in such affairs in the course of his complicated legal affairs. Would Olmert the lawyer have uttered such grave accusations against such a prominent figure if there were no grounds for them, as Barak claimed? It is of course possible, but it is not so logical.

Read the entire article in Globe’s.

(YWN – Israel Desk, Jerusalem)