Return to Transcripts main page

CNN Live Event/Special

CNN International: Netanyahu Pushes Back Against Criminal Charges; Sondland: Quid Pro Quo Was At Trump's "Express Direction"; Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu Facing Indictment; Netanyahu Calls for Investigation of Investigators; Looking Back on Netanyahu's Legacy; Gordon Sondland and Fiona Hill Testify in Impeachment Inquiry. Aired 2-3p ET

Aired November 21, 2019 - 14:00   ET

THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.

BENJAMIN NETANYAHU, PRIME MINISTER OF ISRAEL (through translator): -- to bang my head and to give up on my principles. This is what I was told. However, I got my feeling of justice and what is right, and I'm not ready to give up and -- and to give up justice in the country for which I fought and I got wounded. Country that I put on the map in such a -- in such a respectable place in the world.

I cannot believe in a country like ours could be such a kind of investigations. I'm not going to let the liars to win. I'm going to manage and I'm going to lead this country according to the laws, with responsibility, and with all the concerns related to our democracy and our security and justice.

We need to do one thing. (inaudible) we need, finally, to investigate the investigators. Thank you very much.

LYNDA KINKADE, CNN HOST: I'm Lynda Kinkade. You have just been listening to Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who has of course become the first sitting prime minister in Israeli history to face indictment, and he is facing some pretty serious charges including bribery, fraud and breach of trust.

You heard him just there, taking aim at the investigators, specifically the police and the attorney general. Now, he has repeatedly denied all wrongdoing. And as you heard, he called this process, this investigation "filthy," one that is meant to bring him down.

Well, Israel's attorney general announced the charges against Mr. Netanyahu just a few hours ago. And as he started his statement, he said this is a very tough and sad day.

AVICHAI MANDELBLIT, ATTORNEY GENERAL OF ISRAEL (through translator): The decision to indict was taken with a very heavy heart. And yet I'm very peaceful (ph) with (ph) my (ph) decision in there interest of the public and the citizens of Israel. To obey the law is not a choice, and it's not a matter of politics. This is a duty that everybody has to obey to.

KINKADE: Well, even though the charges have been announced, any formal indictment against Mr. Netanyahu could be months away. Our Oren Liebermann joins us from Jerusalem. He has been following this story as it has unfolded.

And, Oren, as we just heard there from Benjamin Netanyahu, he said you have to be blind to see there isn't something wrong happening here with this investigation. And despite saying that we need law and order, he went on to attack the very institutions that have brought about those charges, calling for an investigation of the investigators.

OREN LIEBERMANN, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Lynda, you had asked a short while ago, before Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu spoke, whether there was any chance he would resign or step down or step aside, and there you have your answer. Netanyahu, very much came out fighting, which is what we expected.

The line of attack that we've seen him keep up from the very beginning, that this was a politically motivated witch hunt, is exactly the line of attack he took this time, except it was even sharper rhetoric and sharper accusations against the police and against the investigators themselves.

As you point out, he tried to an extent here to flip the narrative, saying he's done nothing wrong but now it's time for the public to call to investigate the investigators, suggesting there may be some criminal wrongdoing on that part.

He said that this was a political witch hunt from the very beginning. He pointed to the timing, not only of this announcement but also the announcement back in February, right before April's election, about what charges the attorney general would pursue. He said that was evidence of how political this is, and they weren't looking for criminal wrongdoing, they were looking for him.

So Netanyahu, keeping up that line of attack that we've seen him keep up from the very beginning since these criminal investigations became public. That, in answer to the question, how is Netanyahu going to proceed? Well, he's going to hang onto his seat and he's going to do it with every bit of his strength, trying to rally his supporters behind him.

KINKADE: All right. You were on the money, certainly. Oren Liebermann, good to have you there in Jerusalem.

On this big developing story, I want to bring in our chief international anchor now, Christiane Amanpour, for more on this. Christiane, as always, good to see you.

So Mr. Netanyahu has been in office now -- he was elected in 2009 -- been in office as prime minister for 10 years. What do you make of these allegations and how do you think he can possibly hold on to leadership now, going forward?

[14:05:07]

CHRISTIANE AMANPOUR, CNN CHIEF INTERNATIONAL ANCHOR: Well, these are the questions that everybody wants answered. You saw and you've heard what Oren has been saying, that this was a very, very well-crafted speech, he knew exactly what he was going to say, he obviously had a heads-up about what was coming down the pike, these charges. And he has turned it and flipped it to portray himself as the victim, and says that he's going to continue.

This is an unprecedented case, let's just say it over and over again. No sitting Israeli prime minister has ever been about to be indicted facing criminal charges of this nature. So he's the first, and therefore it's unclear exactly how the -- not just the legal process, but the political process is going to unfold.

Because the legal issue is one thing. And I've been talking to Israel's -- you know, one of the top investigative reporters there, Ronen Bergman, who told me that for Netanyahu, this is a pretty sad moment in terms of all the people who turned witness against him, are people who were his political allies, his friends, people who he appointed from the police commissioner to, as you know, the attorney general. So he's obviously feeling this very personally.

However, the charges are very, very serious. And let's just run through them again. We're talking about one case, the most important and the most difficult case is what the police call Case 4,000. It involves Netanyahu's alleged relationship with Israel's leading telecommunications tycoon, and that's the one that brought the criminal charge of bribery.

TEXT: Benjamin Netanyahu Case 4000: Charge: Fraud and breach of trust, Bribery. Investigators: Netanyahu pushed for reforms in exchange for favorable coverage from Walla! Netanyahu and Walla! owner deny wrongdoing

AMANPOUR: In Case 2,000, his alleged deal with a newspaper publisher for favorable coverage. That would be carrying a charge of fraud and breach of trust.

TEXT: Benjamin Netanyahu Case 2000: Charge: Fraud and breach of trust. Investigators: Netanyahu sought favorable coverage in exchange for limiting rival newspaper. Netanyahu, Mozes deny any wrongdoing

AMANPOUR: And Case 1,000, involving allegations that Netanyahu took gifts worth some $200,000 or more from businessmen in return for promoting their interests. In that one, indictments for fraud and breach of trust.

TEXT: Benjamin Netanyahu Case 1000: Charge: Fraud and breach of trust. Investigators: Tax break given in exchange for gifts. Netanyahu denies any wrongdoing

AMANPOUR: So these are very, very serious. But again, what does it mean for the political situation in which there is a stalemate, there's a constitutional crisis, there's no government.

And we're not quite sure yet what it's going to take if anything to remove Prime Minister Netanyahu from actually carrying out the duties of office or being able to remain not just head of his own party -- that's probably a party matter -- but whether he'll be allowed by the legal system or by the president of Israel, to actually contest another election.

So these are the very important questions, apart from the legal jeopardy that he faces right now.

KINKADE: And, Christiane, just give us a sense of how difficult it must be right now for world leaders to deal with Israel. Given we've had two elections in less than 12 months, still no government formed and now you've got these very serious charges facing the prime minister.

AMANPOUR: Well, look, it's very, very difficult because it still remains an important part of the world as we can see. Not just Israel and the Palestinians, but being right in the middle of not just the Syrian conflict on one side, Lebanon on the other side.

But also Israel is the key plank or one key plank of President Trump's foreign policy. Israel has been sort of grouped with Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates countries as part of the coalition to face off against Iran.

And Prime Minister Netanyahu has been the single-most dedicated leader in the world to essentially pushing back against Iran right to the point, as you know, of urging the president of the United States to pull out of the nuclear accord and all sorts of issues such as that, the nuclear deal.

In addition, Israel, Prime Minister Netanyahu has managed to get enormous personal political favors from President Trump, which upend decades of international law on crucial issues such as the illegality of the Israeli settlements in the occupied West Bank.

According to the United Nations, those remain illegal and to be discussed in a final peace settlement between Israel and the Palestinians. But just this past week, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo basically said publicly that the United States is reconsidering its decades-held policy on that issue, and that they might not necessarily be illegal any more, according to the United States.

As you know, the United States has already signed off on allowing Israeli -- Israel to keep the annexed parts of the Golan Heights. And as you know, President Trump, for (ph) Prime Minister Netanyahu, moved the embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem.

So a lot of established U.S. and international policy has been upended by the pure strength of Israel's prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu's relationship with the current U.S. president. So that's a big area that's -- you know, could also come up for a lot of change if he remains in office or if he doesn't remain in office.

[14:10:09]

KINKADE: It's interesting, Christiane, that Donald Trump right now, obviously here in the U.S., is facing the impeachment hearings. And his (ph) reaction to that has been similar to what we just heard from Benjamin Netanyahu, essentially calling into question the investigators, blaming a hostile media. And all along, obviously, we've heard from Netanyahu, as we have from Donald Trump, calling both those very, very separate investigations a witch hunt. What do you make of the parallels here?

AMANPOUR: Well, there are obviously really major parallels in that regard, in the way they are making their public relations case, both President Trump and indeed Prime Minister Netanyahu. Let's also say that both Prime Minister Netanyahu and President Trump deny any wrongdoing in the different cases that they are both involved in right now, they deny any wrongdoing.

However, I've just been speaking to a former Democratic senator -- obviously not a support of President Trump, obviously an opponent -- but saying that the Israeli system -- the attorney general, the charges, what the attorney general plans to do -- has shown that the institutions will remain according to the rule of law, and will remain above political interference, this according to Senator Russ Feingold.

He compared that unfavorably with the Justice Department in the United States and the attorney general, William Barr, who has said that he does not believe a sitting president can be indicted. And of course President Trump's own lawyers say they don't believe a sitting president should even be criminally investigated.

So he's saying -- this senator, Russ Feingold, former senator from Wisconsin -- that look at the difference between the way the institutions are operating -- you know, the justice institutions -- in both countries.

But you know, this clearly will be -- if -- if Netanyahu is moved out of office and moved out of political power, this will be a blow for President Trump and his presidency.

However, let us not forget that it is the United States of America and its policy that remains committed to Israel, committed to its security and that Israel as a nation is a key United States ally.

KINKADE: Christiane Amanpour for us in London. As always, thank you very much.

Well, I want to talk more about what the indictment means for Mr. Netanyahu's future, and whether this is the end of his political life or just another chapter in a long saga. Well, CNN global affair analyst Aaron David Miller is in Washington, and Yohanan Plesner with the Israel Democracy Institute is in Los Angeles. Good to have you both with us.

YOHANAN PLESNER, PRESIDENT, ISRAEL DEMOCRACY INSTITUTE: Thank you.

KINKADE: Aaron, I want to start with you first because we just heard from Benjamin Netanyahu a short time ago, remaining very defiant, certainly a long way from stepping down from his position as prime minister of Israel. What did you make of his reaction to this? AARON DAVID MILLER, CNN GLOBAL AFFAIRS ANALYST: You know, I've heard him speak many times. This was more rambling and far more emotional and personalized, than many of the presentations and speeches that he's given.

I mean, he referred to the spilled blood of -- of himself and his family, talked about the evil arrayed against him, he used words like "bribery," "blackmail" in an effort to turn the tables and essentially accuse the institutions of the state, investigate the investigators, Lynda, as you -- as you had referenced.

So that's -- that's point number one. Second, I find -- I found it not surprising that he sought to identify himself -- because he has been, in many respects, a very effective leader -- with the state. At one point I think he said, I put Israel on the map. I think he was talking about his efforts to expand relations, not only with the United States but with the former Soviet Union, with Vladimir Putin, expanding Israel's relations into Latin America and Africa.

And finally, the populist tone of his appeal and pitch was not to the party, not to the political elites but to the Israeli public. And I think that is where he somehow believes he is prime minister, caretaker of government to be sure, looks as though, unless there are Likud Party defections, that he may still be prime minister when Israel goes to the polls early next year.

I mean, imagine a situation in which Benjamin Netanyahu manages against every conceivable odd to -- to, unlike his last two electoral contests, actually garner enough support to put together a coalition. I still find that right now, frankly, unimaginable. But as I mentioned to you earlier, he's had many lives and he'll fight to keep this one.

[15:15:05]

KINKADE: It certainly is hard to fathom how this is going to play out, how he can continue in that role, given the gravity of these charges.

In terms of how effective he has been as a prime minister, I just want you to elaborate a little bit more on that, Aaron, for us. Because given he did start out by saying that he's given his life to Israel in his statement a short time ago, and that he's proud of his achievements. Just what do you think are his key achievements, and how do you think they'll be overshadowed by all of this?

MILLER: I mean, first of all, no one -- no one surpasses arguably Israel's greatest prime minister, David Ben-Gurion, in longevity without having an extraordinary skillset. And while I fundamentally do not agree with the way he's undermined the character of Israeli democracy, he's polarized the country. He's run on a platform of -- in many respects, of anti-Arab prejudice and bigotry.

I would point to two fundamental successes, Lynda. Number one, he's been very risk-averse. He has avoided unwanted, untimely and dangerous wars, number one, with respect to Lebanon, for sure, and even his risk aversion with respect to Gaza has been, in many respects, quite measured. He's been very effective at at least countering the Iranian presence in Syria.

And second -- and I find this to be really quite remarkable -- because you never would have believed that a prime minister presiding over a narrow right-wing government with a dedicated expansionist philosophy with respect to settlement activity, would ever have been in a position to see Israel's relations with the world expand and not contract.

He's met with Vladimir Putin over a dozen times, we know about his relationship with Donald Trump. It's a real paradox here. It's -- and -- and his efforts to expand Israel's relations with the Arab world, particularly the Saudis and the Emiratis. That's less attributable to his political skills and more to the emergence and rise of Iran, but he's exploited and capitalized on it.

So I those are the attributes that those who remain steadfast in his corner will -- will depend on, going forward. And final factor, final point, there are many Israelis who cannot imagine life without Benjamin Netanyahu, this certain inexorability, inevitability about his political life.

So those are the strengths. Again, hard to believe that he's going to figure out a way to survive this one, however.

KINKADE: Yes, it certainly seems hard. If you can just stand by for us, Aaron, I just want to bring in Yohanan Plesner.

You, of course -- you're an Israeli politician, you've worked in the Knesset. What do you make of the way Benjamin Netanyahu simply went on to attack the institutions that he in fact oversees?

PLESNER: Well, quite frankly, it was a -- it was a bleak and -- as an Israeli, also a very worrying speech. It was -- he employed a very radical and aggressive rhetoric against the institutions of the rule of law, using terminology that we never heard before, indicating that there might have been a coup here.

Literally, he labelled it a coup, he spoke about a contaminated process and trying to quite clearly erode public trust in our independent institutions of rule of law.

So if anyone had a question about what's going to happen, going forward, there's one clear exclamation mark, which is the prime minister is not going anywhere and he's -- he's taking on an -- in an all-out attack against the institutions of rule of law.

There are many question marks. How will the Israeli public respond to it, what are the legal implications in this interim period, what are the political implications, will his political partners, coalition partners, the Likud, will they go along with him to this all-out war against our institutions of rule of law. So the next few months, we can see a number of scenarios unfolding, but it's quite clear that the prime minister made his decision. He is going to attack all our (ph) -- by the way, as many dependents

typically do. Defendants are never happy with the decisions of those who accuse them, and therefore I think it also proves that those who were worried about the inability of the prime minister, both to run the affairs of state and to protect his name in court, this speech proves that it's virtually impossible.

[14:20:09]

He has to decide and once he has to protect his name in court, it's clear he needs to step aside and otherwise we're going to face quite a tough period.

KINKADE: Absolutely. Yohanan Plesner, Aaron David Miller, good to get your perspectives. Thanks so much for your time, we appreciate it.

PLESNER: Thank you.

KINKADE: Well, still to come tonight, the day's other big story: Two more witnesses testify before U.S. lawmakers in the impeachment inquiry.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

KINKADE: Welcome back. Well, a day after stunning testimony from the U.S. ambassador to the European Union detailing an explicit quid pro quo with Ukraine, two critical witnesses are testifying on Capitol Hill right now, this of course being the fifth day of public impeachment hearings.

Fiona Hill is the former top Russian advisor for the National Security Council, who worked closely with former national security advisor John Bolton.

She began her appearance with pointed remarks aimed at House Republicans. And she blasted what she says is a fictional narrative, that Ukraine and not Russia interfered in the 2016 election.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

FIONA HILL, FORMER TOP RUSSIA ADVISOR TO PRESIDENT TRUMP: Based on questions and statements I have heard, some of you on this committee appear to believe that Russia and its security services did not conduct a campaign against our country, and that perhaps somehow, for some reason, Ukraine did. This is a fictional narrative that has been perpetrated and propagated by the Russian Security Services themselves.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

KINKADE: The other person we're hearing from today is David Holmes, the political affairs counselor at the U.S. embassy in Ukraine. The State Department official overheard that key phone call between E.U. Ambassador Sondland and President Trump at a restaurant in Kyiv, Ukraine. Here he is, describing some key moments. (BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DAVID HOLMES, COUNSELOR, U.S. EMBASSY IN UKRAINE: I heard Ambassador Sondland greet the president and explain he was calling from Kyiv. I heard President Trump then clarify that Ambassador Sondland was in Ukraine. Ambassador Sondland replied yes, he was in Ukraine. And went on to state that President Zelensky, quote, "Loves your ass."

I then heard President Trump ask, so he's going to do the investigation?

Ambassador Sondland replied that he's going to do it, adding that President Zelensky will do anything you ask him to do.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

KINKADE: Well, both Hill and Holmes also took aim at President Trump's personal lawyer Rudy Giuliani. Hill even quoted her boss, Bolton, saying he called Giuliani a "hand grenade" that was going to blow up everyone.

Well, let's get the latest now from White House reporter Stephen Collinson. Good to have you with us, Stephen.

STEPHEN COLLINSON, CNN WHITE HOUSE REPORTER: Hey.

KINKADE: I want to start first with Fiona Hill, of course. Because she set out to debunk that conspiracy theory involving Ukraine, but then went on to issue a warning to those lawmakers, saying essentially, don't let Russia use what happens in this -- in these proceedings in the lead-up to the next election, you know, in terms of influencing the 2020 election.

[14:25:21]

COLLINSON: Right. Fiona Hill is a longtime expert in Vladimir Putin since before she joined the Trump administration as a top Russia expert on the National Security Council.

What we've seen over the last few days is Republicans trying to inflate a narrative that Ukraine was interfering in the 2016 U.S. election, perhaps to try to offer some kind of justification for the president's suspicion of the incoming government of President Volodymyr Zelensky, and perhaps excuse some of the behavior, some of the pressure on Ukraine to investigate his own political opponent, Joe Biden.

Fiona Hill basically argued that any such use of what she said were conspiracy theories that were first promoted by the Russians, that the Ukrainians and not Russia were interfering in the election, were tantamount to playing into the Russian attempt to sow confusion and discord in the U.S. political system, which she said was tearing the U.S. political system apart.

So this was quite a powerful set of arguments that were advanced by Fiona Hill, and I think she was clearly trying to dismiss some of the exculpatory arguments the Republicans were making.

KINKADE: And in terms of what we heard yesterday from the U.S. ambassador to the E.U., Sondland, it was certainly a bombshell testimony, his opening statement, where he basically said, was there a quid pro quo? Yes, there was. And he went on to implicate pretty much everyone from the president, vice president, everyone in that inner circle.

COLLINSON: Right. So after Sondland's testimony, it was clear that he'd dismantled many of the planks of the Republican defense of President Donald Trump, such as it was.

As you say, he said there was a quid pro quo in the sense that a telephone call between Zelensky and President Trump and the carrot of an eventual Oval Office visit between the presidents was conditional on the Ukrainians announcing an investigation into President Joe Biden. That gets to the center of this case.

The impeachment case is all about whether the president abused his power by seeking to get political favors from Ukraine, whether it's for an Oval Office visit, a telephone call or for the release of $400 million in military aid the U.S. was giving to the Ukrainians.

He also, as you said, broadened the circle of this conspiracy. He basically said this wasn't just a rogue operation by Rudy Giuliani that was existing on its own and of the former New York mayor's own volition. He said that Mike Pompeo, the secretary of state, Vice President Mike Pence, and also Mick Mulvaney, the acting White House chief of staff, they were all aware of this and all of them were being kept up on the developments and the effort to pressure Ukraine.

So he significantly undercut a lot of the Republican defense. Of course, he was not a completely perfect witness, he also said that he was never told directly by the president to hold up military aid in turn -- in return for political concessions.

That is something the Republicans have seized on, it was really the only favorable part of his testimony for them, and they are seizing on this basically to say, look, the president didn't ask him for a quid pro quo. But if you look at the testimony in its entirety, it was clearly a very bad day for the president.

KINKADE: It certainly was. All right. Stephen Collinson, we'll leave it there for now. Thank you very much for your time.

[14:29:04]

We're going to get back to those impeachment hearings next hour. But first, coming up after a short break, breaking news out of Israel. Criminal charges laid out against Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. He said a short time ago, they amounted to an attempted coup.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[14:30:40] LYNDA KINKADE, CNN INTERNATIONAL HOST: Hello. I'm Lynda Kinkade. We're going to return now to Israel where for the first time in the nation's history, a sitting prime minister is facing a prospect of criminal indictment.

Hours ago, Israel's attorney general unveiled charges of bribery, fraud, and breach of trust against Benjamin Netanyahu. And they came after what was a three-year investigation into three separate corruption cases.

But any formal indictment against Mr. Netanyahu may indeed be months away. The prime minister has continued to deny any wrongdoing. And in his response to those charges a short time ago, he said the investigation was flawed.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

BENJAMIN NETANYAHU, PRIME MINISTER OF ISRAEL (through translator): Every treaty will say, how dare you talk about integrity of the judicial system? But no, you the public, you have to ask to investigate the investigators. Because the public needs to get clear answers regarding all the investigations, the first investigations conduct against me. They do not look to find the truth. They wanted to find me. And to try to attack me. They do not want the truth. And the entity was blackmail and threaten -- and threats in order to obtain whatever they wanted.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

KINKADE: Benjamin Netanyahu speaking there.

Well, I want to bring in now Oren Liebermann from Jerusalem for more on all of this.

So the prime minister there facing very grave charges but remaining very defiant, attacking the very institutions that are carrying out this investigation going so far as to claim that blackmail was used in some cases to obtain evidence.

OREN LIEBERMANN, CNN JERUSALEM CORRESPONDENT: He started off by saying that it's a dark day for himself, and for his family, and for Israel. He said he respects the judiciary and then he launched an extensive minute's long attack against that very judiciary, saying the investigators need to be investigating, suggesting the criminal wrongdoing is on their part.

Even going as far as to say this was an attempted coup by filing charges against him, marking the first time in Israel's history that a sitting prime minister faces criminal indictment.

Even if the charges haven't been formally filed yet, we now know what they are from Attorney General Avichai Mandelblit's statement. In the most serious case known as Case 4,000, Netanyahu will face a charge of bribery, as well as the charge of fraud and breach of trust in two other cases, known as Case 1,000 and 2,000. He will face in each of them a charge of fraud and breach of trust. If it's not obvious from the statement that we saw from Netanyahu, he is accused the entire process of being political from the investigation to the charges and to every part of this process that he says was directly against him not in pursuit of the truth. He has proclaimed his innocence and it looks like, right now, he'll keep fighting.

Meanwhile, the attorney general who made a statement a short time earlier said there were no conspiracy theories here, there were no political decisions, this was in pursuit of the truth and pursuit of the law and for the good of the state of Israel, for the good of the law that governs the country.

And let's talk about the state of the country really, because the political system is completely in unchartered territory. Here, you've got the prime minister, obviously, facing very serious corruption charges. While at the same time, you've had two elections in less than 12 months and potentially a third one on the way.

Just give us a sense of what's going to happen politically going forward.

[14:35:05]

LIEBERMANN: At this point, it looks like Israel is headed for an unprecedented third election in 12 months and we've already been on unprecedented territory for quite some time now. The political deadlock looks set to remain -- starting depending on how you count it, either in April after the first election of the year or even before that when those elections were called nearly one year ago.

Netanyahu, as we saw, has remained defiant. It doesn't look like he's giving up the position of prime minister, stepping aside or giving up his position as leader of the Likud Party. He's worked very hard to unite the right-wing, religious Zionist, and ultra-orthodox parties behind him.

And if that support holds, that almost certainly means the political deadlock in Israel holds. And it's almost crazy to say this, a third election may not solve any more problems and we might be able to start talking about a fourth election soon. That today is the state of Israeli politics.

As Netanyahu now faces indictment on serious charges, and if he's if convicted, he may very well face jail time here. He is not giving up. The political system remains deadlock. And right now, it works to Netanyahu's advantage because until somebody else is able to form a government, he remains prime minister and he has all of the protections that position affords him.

KINKADE: All right. Oren Liebermann, certainly a very big day there in Israel. Good to have you with us. Thanks so much.

Well, With Mr. Netanyahu facing charges, there's a question of whether his relationship with U.S. President Donald Trump will change. They seem to have had a strong start at the beginning of Donald Trump's presidency, now it's not so clear.

Just days ago though, the Trump administration made a major policy reversal in Netanyahu's favor. U.S. Secretary of State, Mike Pompeo, announced that the U.S. will no longer view West Bank settlements inconsistent with international law saying they are not, quote, inherently illegal with breaks with international consensus.

Well, let's bring in international diplomatic editor, Nic Robertson, joins us now from London. Good to have you with us, Nic.

So Donald Trump often says he wants winners. He likes winners. Right now, we've had two elections in 12 months. Benjamin Netanyahu has been unable to form a government, now facing these very serious corruption changes.

How is this going to impact that relationship that Donald Trump and Benjamin Netanyahu have going forward?

NIC ROBERTSON, CNN INTERNATIONAL DIPLOMATIC EDITOR: Well, I think in the very early stages of that relationship, there was an international perception that perhaps President Trump was trying to build this relationship because he had a clear vision of what a Middle East peace plan looks like for years into this presidency.

Now, effectively, that hasn't really seemed to have emerged. So the relationship that President Trump has developed with Prime Minister Netanyahu really seems to be one that doesn't go a long way beyond that dynamic, beyond the president really giving the Israeli prime minister a lot of what he wants.

I think many international leaders around the world will look at the situation of Israel and recognize that this is an embattled prime minister and an embattled situation with a -- with a stalled political process, if you will, the country, not rudderless, but certainly not enabled by this period of political stasis.

But President Trump doesn't really seem to measure his relationships and calculate them on those terms. Quite why he has sought to benefit this Israeli prime minister so much is unclear. Is it for domestic political gain within the United States? Again, that isn't clear.

But whatever it is that's guiding President Trump in this relationship. He does respect, as you say, people who are successful, but he also respects strong leaders who stand up for what they believe in. And there was a lot of what you heard there, essentially, from Prime Minister Netanyahu that you might well hear and some of the things of President Trump says when being criticized that it's the people who are criticizing him who are wrong, that it's the investigation that's wrong, that it is a witch-hunt, and that the situation against him is being manipulated.

So one can see that, you know, through President Trump's perspective, you know, Prime Minister Netanyahu is not a liability, a political liability at the moment to President Trump.

So one that expect that relationship to endure. But, of course, the really enduring relationship is that between the United States and Israel.

And so this period of difficulty for Israel, as it goes through this process, that may be a longer concern, but perhaps not of this particular president.

KINKADE: And, Nic, give us a sense of the instability that this could all cause, especially in that region. Given Prime Minister Netanyahu has been in that job for 10 years. A period of which has been relatively safe, and secure, and prosperous for Israel.

What could this mean going forward?

ROBERTSON: Well, it was striking that one of things that Prime Minister Netanyahu who said in defense of himself was how he had sort of essentially built international relationships for Israel and really that's been the effect of what we see. He's build alliances with President Vladimir Putin of Russia, as well as the one we were talking about of President Trump recently been made this year in the May Day parade in Moscow at the side of President Putin. And President Putin doesn't give that seat up lightly.

[14:40:16]

So that is clearly a respective relationship. And why would that be? Because Russia is a much greater influence within the Middle East, particularly very close on the borders effectively with Israel and Syria.

But it will be hard to see how that relationship is necessarily going to change, even if there was a change of leadership in Israel. But I think, you know, more broadly, when Israel -- if Israel does get to a point of political crisis within Israel and it's not there yet, then clearly, Israel's enemies, and they were multiple, very close to its borders in the region, they would look for opportunities to exploit that.

But again, what we're seeing in Israel at the moment is following a legal process, that it is a slow legal process, that Prime Minister Netanyahu is throwing everything he can to defend his own position, that he is criticizing the democratic processes within -- that exists within Israel.

But at the moment, it's not -- it's not apparently weakening the state of Israel. But that's where the danger would lie in the -- lie in the future for Israel if that were the case.

KINKADE: All right. Nic Robertson for us, diplomatic international editor in London, thank you so much.

Well, I want to recap those allegations against Benjamin Netanyahu in detail now because he is facing three key cases, which is how these charges are coming about.

So there is case 1,000, which alleges fraud and breach of trust. Investigators accused Netanyahu of receiving gifts from overseas billionaires worth around $280,000. And investigators claim that in exchange for the gifts, Netanyahu tried to advance a tax break that would have benefited the businessmen who sent those gifts.

Well, Case 2,000 is an allegation of fraud and breach of trust. And investigators there claim Netanyahu asked Arnon Mozes, the owner of one of Israel's largest newspapers for favorable coverage. And in exchange, investigators alleged that Netanyahu offered to limit the circulation of a rival newspaper owned by a Netanyahu donor.

And in Case 4,000, the most important, this relates to the allegations of fraud and breach of trust and bribery. Now, investigators claim Netanyahu advanced regulations that benefitted the telecom's firm, Bezeq.

Now, the case alleges that Netanyahu received favorable news coverage from Bezeq subsidiary, it's news portal Walla. Netanyahu, of course, continues to deny any wrongdoing as does Bezeq's primary shareholder who's also obviously a friend of Netanyahu.

I want to talk more about the mood in Israel, Reuven Hazan joins us now. He is a professor of political science at Hebrew University in Jerusalem. Good to have you with us.

REUVEN HAZAN, PROFESSOR, HEBREW UNIVERSITY: Good evening from Jerusalem.

KINKADE: Give us a sense of the feeling there in Jerusalem as this has played out. We've heard from the attorney general lay out these very serious charges of bribery, of fraud, of breach of trust from a man who has led the country for the last decade. What's the feeling there?

HAZAN: Well, the country is being split for quite some time and Netanyahu has manipulated that split quite well. So if you talk to Israelis today, you'd probably find half the population that thinks that these are indeed Trumped up charges. That Netanyahu's capable of winning the election after election, and nobody can unseat him so they're using the media and the courts to remove him.

The other half of the country thinks that this is a horrible situation, that we're being led by a man who can't tell the difference between what's good for him and what's good for the country. That his power and being in power for 10 years has led him to be corrupt and it's really time to move on. To get Netanyahu out, to let this country mend again and to really think of the day after Netanyahu.

KINKADE: And when could that day be? Because clearly, from what we've heard from Benjamin Netanyahu today, he is defiant, he wants to stay on and he is attacking the very institutions that are carrying out this investigation. What's the risk with him doing that when it comes to the stability of the country?

HAZAN: Well, the risk is that we're also in the middle of probably a third election. We are now in unprecedented territory in Israel. We've had two elections in five months. After the second election, the two leaders of the two largest parties failed in putting together a government.

[14:45:07]

We are now, for the first time ever, asking the parliament to nominate a third person. The only way we can get out of this political deadlock is if the two main parties come together to form a majority government.

But now with Netanyahu having these indictments, there's no way that the two parties will sit together under Netanyahu. So what is the most likely scenario is when these three weeks are up, the parliament will be dissolved, 90 days later is an election, the third one, and this will be the worst election of all three because we will be fighting over the democratic institutions of this country.

This election campaign is likely to rip the country apart.

KINKADE: All right, Reuven Hazan on that note, we've got to leave it there for now, but some important analysis from Jerusalem. Thank you so much for your time.

We're going to take a quick break. We've got a lot of other news today. We'll be right back. Stay with CNN.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

KINKADE: Welcome back. Well, a pretty frightening sight in Australia on Thursday, a dust storm turned the sky orange as it swept through the city of Mildura in Victoria.

The orange dust is topsoil dried by the scalding temperatures which then, of course, was picked up by strong winds where temperatures of more than 40 degrees have fueled a serious of climate problems throughout Australia in recent weeks including, of course, those terrible bush fires.

Well, British Prime Minister, Boris Johnson, says there's no evidence of Russian interference in British politics. The U.K., of course, goes to the polls December 12th. Then at a campaign stop on Wednesday, the British prime minister was asked why the government won't go public with parliament's report on the hostile Russian activities.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Why are the government withholding the dossier on Russian interference in U.K. elections and referendums when it's already been given the green light by secret services?

BORIS JOHNSON, BRITISH PRIME MINISTER: There's absolutely no evidence that I've ever seen of any Russian interference in U.K. democratic processes and that's for that particular report.

I saw no reason whatever to change the timetable for publications a report just because there was a general election going on.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

KINKADE: Well Boris Johnson's conservative party is also under fire for its online campaigning after one of its Twitter accounts was rebranded to look like an independent fact checker. The U.K.'s electoral commission is now urging all political parties to be transparent in their campaigning.

Well, Britain's Prince Andrew is withdrawing even further from public life. On Thursday, the queen's second son announced he would resign as patron of a prominent charity and that it was stepping down as chancellor of Huddersfield University.

[14:50:10]

Well, on Wednesday, Andrew said he would pull back from public duties in response to the outcry over an interview in which he tried to explain he has friendship with convicted sex offender, Jeffrey Epstein.

Well, much more to come including highlights from the U.S. impeachment hearings today. Testimony still underway right now. We're going to get you up to speed.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

KINKADE: Welcome back. I'm Lynda Kinkade. Well, we updated you on today's impeachment testimony earlier in the show, and we're going to return to the action on Capitol Hill in just a few moments.

But the world is still talking about the explosive testimony from Gordon Sondland, the U.S. ambassador to the European Union which connected President Trump directly to the quid pro quo with Ukraine.

Sondland said everyone around President Trump knew he wanted Kiev to announce an investigation that would help him politically. And he even provided investigators with e-mails and text messages to prove it.

CNN's Sara Murray has the details of Wednesday's testimony.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

GORDON SONDLAND, U.S. AMBASSADOR TO THE EUROPEAN UNION: Was there a quid pro quo? As I testified previously, with regard to the requested White House call and the White House meeting, the answer is yes.

SARA MURRAY, CNN POLITICAL CORRESPONDENT: Gordon Sondland, an ambassador who spoke directly with President Trump, testified that the president engaged in a quid pro quo, and everybody knew about it.

SONDLAND: To Secretary Pompeo, Secretary Perry, I've mentioned to Vice President Pence before the meetings, with the Ukrainians that I had concerns that the delay in aid had become tied to the issue of investigations.

A lot of people were aware of it and -- (CROSSTALK)

REP. ADAM SCHIFF (D-CA): Including Mr. Mulvaney?

SONDLAND: Correct. Everyone was in the loop. It was no secret.

MURRAY: The U.S. Ambassador to the European Union explain that President Trump withheld a White House meeting to pressure Ukraine to publicly announce investigations that could boost Trump politically. An effort the president directed through Rudy Giuliani.

SONDLAND: We did not want to work with Mr. Giuliani. Simply put, we were playing the hand we were dealt. Mr. Giuliani was expressing the desires of the President of the United States, and we knew these investigations were important to the president.

MURRAY: Sondland said he quickly concluded military aid was also being held up in exchange for an announcement of investigations into 2016 and Burisma, the Ukrainian company Joe Biden's son served on the board of.

SONDLAND: If he can't get a White House meeting without the statement, what makes you think you're going to get a, you know, $400 million check? Again, that was my presumption.

MURRAY: But Trump never told Sondland that explicitly, a victory for Republicans in otherwise damning testimony for the president.

STEVE CASTOR, REPUBLICAN COUNSEL: Did the president ever tell you about any pre-conditions for anything?

SONDLAND: No.

CASTOR: OK. So the president never told you about any pre-conditions for the aid to be released?

SONDLAND: No.

CASTOR: The president never told you about any pre-conditions for a White House meeting?

SONDLAND: Personally, no.

MURRAY: Still, Sondland pieced it together when security aid remained frozen along with the White House meeting.

DANIEL GOLDMAN, DEMOCRATIC COUNSEL: Is this kind of a two plus two equals four conclusion that you reached?

SONDLAND: Pretty much.

[14:55:01]

GOLDMAN: It's the only logical conclusion to you that given all of these factors that the aid was also a part of this quid pro quo?

SONDLAND: Yes.

MURRAY: Sondland also recounted his colorful conversations with the president.

GOLDMAN: You confirmed to President Trump that you were in Ukraine at the time and that President Zelensky, quote, loves your ass, unquote. Do you recall saying that?

SONDLAND: It sounds like something I would say. That's how President Trump and I communicate. A lot of four-letter words. In this case, three-letter.

MURRAY: And Trump's claim that there was no quid pro quo.

SONDLAND: He seemed very cranky to me. I just said what do you want from Ukraine? I may have even used a four-letter word. And he said I want nothing. I want no quid pro quo.

MURRAY: But even though Trump refused to call it a quid pro quo, Sondland testified Trump was still demanding a public announcement of the investigations before any White House meeting.

He also said no one seemed to care whether the Ukrainian president actually carried out the investigations which could undercut the White House claim that Trump was simply trying to fight corruption.

SONDLAND: He had to announce the investigations. He didn't actually have to do them as I understood it.

MURRAY: After lawmakers on both sides of the aisle took shots at Sondland's credibility --

REP. SEAN PATRICK MALONEY (D-NY): Hold on, sir.

SONDLAND: Excuse me. I've been very forthright and I really resent what you're trying to do.

MALONEY: Fair enough. You've been very forthright, this is your third try to do so, sir. Didn't work so well the first time, did it? We had a little declaration coming after you, do you remember that?

And now we're here the third time and we got a doozy of a statement from you this morning. There's a whole bunch of stuff you don't recall.

So all due respect, sir, we appreciate your candor, but let's be really clear on what it took to get out of you.

MURRAY: They moved on to testimony from top State Department official David Hale, and top Pentagon official, Laura Cooper, where Cooper revealed for the first time that the Ukrainians already knew something was up with the first in security assistance the same day as Ukrainian President Zelensky's call with Trump.

SCHIFF: On that day you got inquiries, your staff got inquiries from someone at the Ukrainian embassy who was concerned about the status of the military assistance, is that correct?

LAURA COOPER, MEMBER, U.S. SENIOR EXECUTIVE SERVICE: Sir, that's correct. I would say that, specifically, the Ukrainian embassy staff asked what is going on with Ukrainian security assistance.

Sara Murray, CNN, Washington.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

KINKADE: Thanks so much for watching, I'm Lynda Kinkade. Stay with CNN for more special coverage of the impeachment inquiry in the United States. That's coming up next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

KINKADE: Welcome back, I'm Lynda Kinkade. We have been following the impeachment inquiry happening live right now on the U.S. capitol. Dr. Fiona Hill and David --

END