to compensate the victim of aggression for all damages and even then it is quite possible to confiscate these assets in favor of ukraine in this case, well, this is his point of view, you and i are not lawyers, but i think that this is serious, and this and this are actually being discussed. in general, if we are talking about the decision of the united states to provide aid to ukraine, israel and taiwan, the actual negotiations continue. for concessions in order to move this very decision from deadlock, but at what stage are these negotiations now? i tried to find some the news on this, the latest news, it 's from december, it actually said that the senators even during the holidays, during the vacation that they went on, they're continuing to consult, there's a... a group of six

senators, three democrats and three republicans who are negotiating a compromise that doesn't involve aid to ukraine, as you know, that involves changes to american immigration law, and the senate goes back to work on monday, so then they will officially resume their talks, and you can expect some statement to reporters, as the senators will be returning to washington, just reporters will be asking them in... as usual, how these things are going, let's hope that there will be some news next week, early next week, but while we have the following signals, in particular, i refer now to the spokesman of the us state department, matthew miller, who with his last speech stirred up our society a little. we will continue to support ukraine as long as necessary, this is the policy of the united states, this...doesn't mean that we will maintain

the same level of military funding as in 2022 and 2023. we do not believe that there is a need for this. the united states, according to him , is betting on independence, or such subjectivity, at least so, in the near future, perhaps, of our military-industrial complex. dmytro koleba, the minister of foreign affairs of ukraine, reassures, and says that it is not worth fussing, it is not about the 24th year. and about the concept of the united states as a whole. in the beginning they helped a lot, but we continue to watch how ukraine takes the initiative in this sense . are there certain fears here? do you have i don't have any, i think dmytro koleb is right. the fact is that, as i see this quote from matthew miller in ukraine, someone twisted it, someone did not give it completely. the fact is that he really is. meant the future

was uncertain, because he said that the goal of the united states is for ukraine to be a free, democratic country, to stand firmly on its own two feet, so it is in the interest of the united states to ensure the opportunity for ukraine to produce ammunition and weapons in ukraine, but he went on to emphasize, you quoted his texts, but that's about half of what he said, he goes on to say that we're not there yet, and so we have to continue aid to ukraine, at least at the same level as it was in 22-23, that is, this is a long-term strategic goal, but it is not at all about the fact that the administration is in favor of reducing aid to ukraine now, the point is , which is the opposite of these 60, more than 60 billions which the administration is asking congress

to allocate for aid to ukraine, there the money for military aid has been increased, the request has been increased almost one and a half times, and for the allocation of weapons under the pda program, under which weapons are simply transferred from the base pentagon, and for the order of weapons through the program of assistance to ukraine in the industry security, the white house is asking for an increase in these expenditures for the 24th year, that is, they plan to provide ukraine with more weapons in the 24th year than even in the 23rd year, the expenditures are slightly reduced, i think, in this request white house on other types of aid, there for direct financial aid, humanitarian aid, but it is for military aid that the white house is asking to increase spending for the 24th year. let's talk, mr. igor, about what's happening specifically in... american

politics, because this week it just became known that the president of the united states, donald trump, the former president of the united states, donald trump, he can... enlist the support of the supreme court of the united states to exclude the possibility of pre-emption to primary elections in those american states where the authorities have already made such a decision, well, for now this is the state of colorado, there is also the state of maine. to what extent, in principle, can the supreme court of the united states support trump, or can it be that the decision of the supreme court will become sensational and indeed, for the first time in history, a candidate for the office of the president of the united states will not be allowed. to participate in the election campaign? look i'd be happy if it was , like you just said, but i'm not a lawyer, but i think the supreme court is on trump's side in this case, unfortunately, well, the thing is

because whatever the ideological views, the ideological beliefs of the supreme court justices, they are still judges, and they follow the law, the fact is that ... trump's exclusion from the election, according to the third part of the 14th amendment to the constitution of the united states, since trump has not been found guilty by any court of law of sedition against the united states, it is subject to the interpretation of specific officials, such as in the state of maine, the secretary of state, which is responsible for conducting elections. or particular court, the supreme court of the state of colorado, which, in response to a lawsuit by several public organizations, suspended trump from participating in the primaries, the supreme court can interpret it differently, i think that because of the court's verdict against trump,

the court's indictment of trump about his participation in the rebellion against the united states, the supreme court will most likely say that if you... there is no year, then it cannot be said that he participated in the rebellion against the united states, so he, he can participate in the elections, although i would be glad if he did not take part in the elections. and please tell me how generally in the united states such decisions can be based, in particular on the personalities of supreme court judges, because well, i will just remind you that a certain part of them was appointed during the terms of office of donald trump, we in... in the country are used to believe that you know, for whom the judge was appointed, he will protect him in every way where he can afford it. i hope that this tradition is already slowly changing, but is something like this even possible? be in the states, is there still an institution

above all else, and despite the fact that the judges are absolutely specific people, they will be guided exclusively by the norms of the law. i think it's just the last one... true, even though three of the nine supreme court justices are trump appointees, if even the supreme court is going to side with trump in this case, it's not because these justices are trump appointees, but after all, they are judges, and if there is a law that clearly says something, they cannot go against the law, even if they do not like this law, and there have already been cases when this law the supreme court has ruled against trump, and more than once, this supreme court, let's say, has ruled against him. trump during trump's challenge to the results of the 20th election, he ruled against trump when trump did not want to provide, say, his tax returns, and several more times, that is, when there is a law, then the judges, who would be their ideological belief,

whoever appointed them, they are still judges, and they are simply guided by the law, when there is no clear law in some cases, then they can be guided. your beliefs with their own feelings, how these or other things should be interpreted, but when there is clearly a law, then i think that at least the vast majority of judges of the supreme court will be guided by the valid, valid law. well, there is also a question about public trust , you remember that the supreme court of the united states once passed mr. igor, an absolutely fundamental decision for the future of the country in the gore v. bush case, when the vice president of the united states, albert gore, tried to object the victory of george bush jr. in the elections for the head of the us state, the court made a decision in favor of bush , not grief, but many people in the american media at that time said that such

a decision was made because the court has a conservative majority, and the majority of judges are appointed by republican presidents, films were then made about it, about stolen victory, it's become such a meme, and if now in... makes such a decision in favor of trump, won't it turn out that most of the american media will say that the judges did it, precisely because the majority of the judges of the supreme court of the united states are appointed by republican presidents, and judges are appointed by the president. democrats in the minority? i think the media can say that, well, it's entirely possible, as i agree that the decision in favor of bush in 2000, it was more ideological then based on the laws, although bush, quite honestly, in florida there was then a recount , he got about 500 more votes, but there was no clear definition. because it happened for the first time in history, it was not regulated in any way, that's why

this was a case where the judges could, based on their beliefs, conscious or subconscious, and i think that if there is a decision in favor of trump in this case, there will be, of course, that there will be a media that will not like it, they will say, which is precisely because three of the justices there are trump appointees and most of the justices are appointed by a republican president. well, again, i think that the vast majority of judges will use the law, but if there is a clear definition in the law, they will use this clear definition, even if they do not understand this law like, well, it seems that if we talk about candidates from each of the parties, everything is clear with the democrats, actually joseph biden, the current president of the united states, but with the republicans it is still not completely clear with... clear, in particular for the reasons we just talked about, what are the main

trends right now, but at this stage we understand that they can change in the coming months, already literally at the beginning of spring, super tuesday, i think it will be tremendously interesting to watch, and what are the main trends now, what is possible public sentiment now regarding the republican candidates, trump has high support, but is it unanimous... but it is enough to talk about the indisputability of his nomination, it is not unanimous, but the support is so great that i think it is possible to talk about non-appealability, because the first priymaries will be held on january 15, no primaries , caucuses are not held, caucuses are held there, such party meetings, people come to the meetings, vote for candidates from their party. and trump will definitely win them, after he will start to win in one state

after another, he will win everywhere, maybe he will not win the republican primaries somewhere, well, in very blue states, democratic states, where the republicans can be more moderate, but he has an undeniable advantage, that is, in the country there is about 39 million registered republicans, and of those, about 25. they support trump, they absolutely do, it doesn't matter to them what trump does, what he says, what gets out about him, it doesn't matter to them that he's accused of 91- oh a criminal offense , they will support him, unfortunately, the problem is because trump is the answer to the demand of a large number of people, the problem is not trump himself, the problem is that there is a demand for trump, well, others, if we... given the other candidates, let's say in the future, like literally yesterday or the day before yesterday, the candidate

ramaswamy, the republican one, he positions himself like this, he is the same as trump, so that trump's voters will support him, but he is young, handsome, that's why he's bigger energetic, he said that he would take the united states out of nato, that is, if he becomes president, well, you see, they are very little different from each other. the candidate who is running in second place , the governor of the state of florida, ron desantis, he is always relying on, and he emphasizes this, that he is only going to rely on, as he says, conservative voters, that he is standing up for conservative interests, which, by the way, the exact opposite of how president joe biden positions himself because he says i am i am the president of all americans, i will be... the president of all americans, i will protect

the interests of all americans, well, there is another candidate that we see on the screen right now, nikki haley, who, by the way, very sincerely supports ukraine, but when, let's say, at various republican debates or in her speeches, she talks about internal political things, she is absolutely there in the very, very right sector, where trump is, where desantis is. where there is ramosvamino, because the majority of the republican party is such that it has other ideas, except, well, literally reactionary ideas about these domestic political things, do not... support, i think that if nothing changes, then trump, yes, he is the undisputed leader, and he will be the republican candidate, that what can change something is court verdicts, possible , if he is found guilty of criminal offenses, well, the first trial, it

is set for march 4th, it will most likely be postponed because trump is filing. appeal, which will be heard next tuesday by the court of appeals for the district of columbia, he appealed, he claims that if he did something as president, it doesn't matter what he did, that he has immunity, well, most likely he will be denied by the appeals court, and then he will be denied by the supreme court, but he he can delay the start of the trial, which is his purpose, in fact, he wants to postpone the trial for a while. after the election, but another trial is set for march 25th in new york, this is in the jurisdiction of the state of new york for his fraud, falsification of financial documents, and this crime was committed before he became president, that is, he will not be able to delay this process here, but if there are

guilty verdicts, it still will not turn away from trump those who... love among the republicans, among those approximately 25 million people, but it may turn away from him independent voters, non-party voters, and it could significantly reduce his chances of winning the election in november, so that could, could affect the and what's going on, and everything else, i think not, because neither rondosan nor nikki haley, they actually have a chance to beat trump in the primary with him. have, they can to argue for second place, there are rumors that trump may offer, say, monica haley, to run for vice president with him, several, several newspapers and tv programs have reported about this recently, but it is not known whether it will happen or not, if it will , this means that trump wants, will want to rely on

such classic republicans, more moderate, who... the presidential candidate of his party. yes, thank you, mr. igor. ihor eisenberg, a professor at new york university, was in touch with us. thank you once again, and we remind you that we are keeping a close eye on what is happening. in the united states, because actually a lot in ukraine depends on the processes there. and dmytro chikalkin, a diplomat, translator, tv presenter, blogger, in addition, the first consul of ukraine in israel, i'll just remind you, is now in touch with us. congratulations, mr. dmytro, glory to ukraine. glory to the heroes, good evening, friends. congratulations, mr. dmytro. we will talk with you

about this public disturbance in connection with the bad jokes of our humorists, not only here. quarter 95 - diesel show, and that's it such a contemptuous attitude towards ukrainians , for which we have to apologize, and on the other hand, in other countries, people are used to such harsh jokes on themselves, and they are, i would say, part of the media space, there is some charlie hebdo magazine, laughing at the french, yes , as we never dreamed, why are we so sensitive, as you think, well, first of all, that we are going through the most tragic period of our modern history, you know, i always repeated this formula that in addition to a sense of humor, a sense of tact and feeling is also important measures, and what others have under the circumstances, the population might not have died, but even today there is such, well, compared to ebanite sticks, a ukrainian porn actress or tomos thermos, these were quite such, one might

say, more balanced jokes, yes, that is, there was no such thing at the time... when we heard that there was the slogan glory to ukraine, which we just greeted in the programs of the 95th quarter, ridiculed it, said that it was necessary to make room in the lviv toilets of the time, yes, but then society at first, they treated it condescendingly, there wasn't the kind of wave of concern and outrage that really led to... what it led to, because i 've always said that we don't underestimate the role of this political technological tool that is humor, and that unfortunately ... today it is used by russia, it continues to be used by the russian federation, at one time i cited these astronomical figures, which we will assume gazprom

media paid simply paid kishenkov and putin's media structure through promedia paid 350 million dollars simply for copyright the rights to the comedy club, well, that is, what rates were there at kona at one time. the same disgraceful tv series servant of the people, about which it was recently written in the russian wikipedia that the main fable of this tv series is the confrontation of such a mischievous, stupid ukrainian, the thieving zavhar budek, the luminary of russian civilization , great russian culture, professor, academician kovalev, i.e. for the production of a season, or rather two seasons a year of this series. that is, i am a person who was engaged in production, including television products, and radio product, internet projects, uh, i

understand how far these numbers are from reality, that is, unfortunately, i well understood that it does not happen so simply by chance, yes, that it is, unfortunately, this kind of political-technological operation, which ... aims to manipulate public opinion , so that people, without watching this tv series matchmaker, understand that we all live here somehow in one, one people, as zelensky said, yes, one, one jokes, one culture, one, even there was currency, it was putin who said, it was another president, well, why did zelensky repeat it it was in his infamous broadcast in donetsk in april 2014, right? we speak the same language, the same people , that is, here for me from the time when he first shouted on the stage, well, what i

saw him and what my classmates, graduates of our military institute of foreign languages ​​in in moscow, when he stood up, he would fall to his knees and shout: "vladimir vladimirovich, take me away from this unfortunate ukraine." that is, they still said: "now, the card will be against this guy, yes, that is." nothing here for me there was nothing surprising, especially since i, unfortunately , well, understood that this political-technological tool of public opinion manipulation is used in that, among other things, due to the fact that the role of my vassily yats project and the operation of the professor in 2004 were appreciated there , when the late gleb pavlovsky was summing up his political-technological activity as the head of the staff technologists of yanukovych's staff at the time, he said that he called me the blockbuster hit of the orange revolution, he said that we really changed

the psychological situation in the country, because in back in september 2004, almost 60% of ukrainians there were ready to vote for yushchenko , the candidate at that time, yes, but only 15% believed in his victory, that is, i personally perceived it as such an insult, like a slap in the face, how society signed off on its own helplessness, and that's why , well, you can say , he returned to political technology, because he left it at one time there in 2001, but he really appreciated it . gleb pavlovsky highly appreciated it and asked such a question in this interview, he says: why russia does nothing on the contrary, why are we not doing anything to protect russian... interests in ukraine, and then, i often remember this story, oksana marchenko once told about it, just as medvedchuk invited

the entire editorial team of the 95th leadership to his place in pushcha azornaya quarter, and then the yaitsya sickle project first appeared on the internet, it is interesting that now you will not find any mention of this project on the internet, but if you type in youtube the srpm on yaitsya. you will see works of this art that will eventually be used by this very content that they are accumulated in six months, was used in the very first season of the 95th quarter, which was filmed here in the october palace, and on the eve of the then parliamentary company, it came out just under the banners of this block and completely repeated in its messages the main ideas that the speakers. of this bloc, medvedchuk, boyko and shufrych are there first of all , remember this advertisement, they said that we only need russia, that ukraine is for us, that the west, the west of the west, ukraine is needed as a dumping ground for

nuclear in... approach, well that is, the same ones, on alas, the narratives, messages that passed later during the years of activity of the 95th quarter, and that i, as a former diplomat there , was so outraged that in these three seasons of this infamous project - a servant of the people, in the period when already 7% of the ukrainian territory was occupied, but in those dozens of series there is not a single hint of russia, as in the security of the danger for ukraine, there the main, the main threat to the ukrainian state is the imf, do you remember how zelensky sent there, or rather holoborodko eloquently sends this the head of the imf is there on a walking tour, or how they meet in geneva in this big hall, the world bank, and they tell zelensky that your place is to grow corn there, yes, zelensky beats his chest there, shouts, so are we a missile state, we want to produce missiles

, they say to him... no, know your place, yes, that is, who was in the interpretation of these screenwriters, screenwriters, that is, why not , it is surprising, and even unfortunate, citizens of russia, that kiryushchenko himself, a citizen of russia, who has now been appointed there, was even appointed the head of some of our film industry in ukraine, but he was the main producer and screenwriter of this series, that is , things were so obvious, that is, the very fact that zelenskyi... during the 25 years of his activity as a satirist, he never made a sharp joke about we will not see putin in any of them, well, that is, if we compare even with our project funny eggs, then the second character after yanukovych was odious putin, we had masks, these are cartoons, these are all blanks for

production. cartoon, they were just there to highlight this terrible role that this character plays in the history of ukraine, but zelensky mocked ukrainian politicians, yes, played a poho burial of the same poroshenko, i will remind you in one of these series of his series, where he mocked his parents, apparently the late poroshenko and his children, in general, when i saw in his... about the fact that they had some kind of sketch about how poroshenko's children got into an accident, i don't know, i have four children, i would as with poroshenko, if he had joked like that , i would, i don't know what i would have done with him, which, if i had found myself on the same stage with him, as it was with poroshenko, the question, sir, mr. dmitry, well but charlie hebdo makes much tougher jokes about french politicians, against the background of which a funeral of a living

politician looks absolutely perfect. in children's speech, you remember that editor, they laughed at the prophet muhammad there, they laughed at sarkazy, i will remind you that when the son of president sarkazy, it was famous story, he met his future bride there, they said that he was ready to convert to judaism for the sake of this bride's money, there was such a caricature, but this is not done at the expense of the state, in our edition , it is not enough that it is done at the expense of the state, well of ours, we, as taxpayers , pay to finance a tv channel today, the owner of which is perhaps the most wanted criminal in financial corruption cases in the world, let me remind you that the western press calls mr. kolomoisky, who ultimately led to the victory of this of the 95th quarter by the operator of the biggest money laundry scheme in the world bank in history, the biggest money laundering scheme in...

the entire history of the world banking system, that is, today we are financing from our own pockets a channel that belongs to a corrupt oligarch, and on this the channel has a studio owned by its ukrainian president, and he jokes for our money in such a way that it outrages a normal part of ukrainian society, that is, it is completely inappropriate, i am here now , well, not only now, i have been following for 20 years the most successful, in my opinion, satirical project in the world today. this is the israeli project eresneederet, this is a wonderful country, that 's what they are doing now, here it is three months after the start of this hamas attack, all of them, before the main object of their satire, is dina rosenblum, there, there, from the star of the show - business, politics, and today, well, the last ones there, their skits, which are typed.