The trial of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is here.
There was a reason that Netanyahu wanted to put off this moment for as long as he could. He is now in a no-spin zone.
Until now, he could make speeches about wanting to have live television confrontations with his accusers, even though he knew that is not the way any legal system works.
Netanyahu could make public debates about the credibility of the police or the prosecution and issue Facebook videos complaining (legitimately) about unfair leaks about his case to the media.
But the moment the indictment is filed and the inevitable trial starts, in days or weeks, he will enter the courtroom not as the prime minister but as a defendant.
Former prime minister Ehud Olmert did all he could in the Holyland trial to lecture and intimidate Tel Aviv Judge David Rozen from convicting him for bribery. But Rozen went with the cold, hard facts.
Netanyahu may yet be acquitted of all three corruption charges against him.
In Case 2000, the Yediot Aharonot-Israel Hayom Affair, he probably has a strong chance of acquittal, since the alleged bribery scheme never went through – and the charges of breach of trust against him, though morally problematic, are hard to define legally.
But Case 4000, the Bezeq-Walla! Affair, will be extremely hard for him to survive unscathed.
Two witnesses, former top aides Shlomo Filber and Nir Hefetz, will finally come forward and testify in public.
The confrontation that Netanyahu said he would relish will finally arrive, and it is highly doubtful that the prime minister will relish it.
Politically speaking, the actual big witnesses probably will not testify until after the next government is formed.
But now, when voters decide on March 2 – and when political parties decide who to support after March 2 – they will all know that any government run by Netanyahu will have to continue in the midst of an ugly trial.
More than that, if Netanyahu succeeds at staying in the premier’s chair after March 2, chances are that within a year or so there will be a verdict, which means that if he is convicted, there is now a final end date for his political career, whether people vote for him or not.
Until now, the question was whether the courts might force him out early because of an indictment, with there being different legal interpretations over the issue.
Now, the whole country knows that there is likely a ticking clock on ending his time in power, and once a prime minister is convicted and his appeals are exhausted, he is automatically and immediately out. There is no ambiguity.
His only chance for political survival now is to win an acquittal – not with public-relation stunts, but with having to confront the tough and concrete evidence facing him.
Ticktock, ticktock.