Answer

It would be worthwhile to link to the column being referred to. I assume you mean this one:
https://www.maariv.co.il/journalists/Article-780993
I don’t have an opinion about the demonstrations, because I don’t follow the news (and even if I did follow it, it would probably be hard to extract reliable information from it). But although I identify with most of what Liebskind says, there are a few comparisons there that are seriously lacking. For example, the fact that people join the demonstrations based on different arguments is completely legitimate. Everyone wants Bibi to go, each for his own reasons. Is it really impossible to include in a demonstration against the disengagement people who oppose it because of our right to the land together with those who oppose it because of security considerations? There are some other problematic comparisons there as well.
Another point: his remark that the media had no personal issue with Sharon or Rabin, and that if they had reversed their policies nobody would have said anything against them, in contrast to Netanyahu, where the opposition to him is personal. This comparison too is lacking, because in truth the opposition to him is personal. Corruption and moral decay are not the same as a decision about one step or another.
To demonstrate inconsistency in Yair Lapid is about like bringing examples that Haaretz is left-wing.
“Money, government, organized crime”—he plays innocent and says that even if Netanyahu is convicted, that’s not organized crime. That really is playing innocent. It is organized crime, even if the names aren’t Molner or Abergil. And perhaps even worse, because he does it through the power of government that he received from us.
There is more, but this is not the place to elaborate.