exclusively against the russians, now answering your question about the possibility of a terrorist attack, my personal assessment is, well, 90 percent likely, that in a fairly short period of time, a period of time, we can see something, well, something, some kind of manifestation and action in the russian federation , so they are now in the russian federation and very carefully protect shopping centers, some concerts, they set the framework. became a searcher, the police will stand with the dogs, or the police with the dogs, or the dog with the police, and the special forces will be everywhere, but usually the special services are preparing for terrorist attacks that have already taken place, a new terrorist attack , it can be in a completely different location, in a completely different place, it's not important, i don't know there, subway, airport, replacement plane, whatever, i think that idil will show himself purely on principle , that ah yes, the wine is not... believed, ah, this is how you treated those

people who did this, there they cut off the ear, there they connected wires to the genitals, we will show you, that is, i personally expect that there may be the next terrorist attack, maybe double. mr. ivan, in parallel with this , xenophobic sentiments are unfolding in russia, regarding the tajiks, in relation to the kyrgyz there and also in relation to other nationalities, more than 120 nations and nationalities live in the russian federation as well, to what extent is this factor that xenophobia can simply cover the russian federation and provoke, including , violent clashes between security forces, russian security forces with those by the peoples and nationalities that live in the russian federation, and as russians who believe that all tajiks are to blame for this.

the turkmens are to blame for this, the kazakhs are to blame for this, or who else, well, that is, to what extent can this national factor undermine russia? oh, it's a difficult question, look, there really is such an attitude towards all the inhabitants of the countries of central asia, tajikistan, uzbekistan, kazakhstan, kyrgyzstan, well, the russians don't distinguish them at all, they don't care, i won't call it the word they use, well , words rather, they have one attitude, that is, you are not like a slav, that is, everything, you are... bad, about the inhabitants of the north caucasus, they are afraid to say this, so it is very likely that if that terrorist attack is the next, then it will be committed not exactly residents, well , natives of the countries of central asia, but perhaps i don't know, some other african countries, for example, that is, in a completely different way, something will be different, first of all, such xenophobic manifestations concern citizens who are not citizens of the russian federation, who work illegally in construction, clean the streets, and... they such people perform

service services, and i don’t know there, there is a large trade network, searches are currently taking place there, where uros work, well, citizens of the countries of central asia, that is, the russian federation may hypothetically face such a problem as a shortage or a large the problem with the labor force, and now the russians really do not have enough people there in certain directions, and if these people go to their countries, if they leave the russian federation, then... i can roughly predict certain, well, not social upheavals, but economic upheavals, i'm not saying that they will be something, something big, something large-scale, but very unpleasant for the russians, well, for now , another black swan, to say that, for example, i don't know, citizens of turkmenistan will fight with the police russian, so locally it can be, but so that they start fighting and shouting slogans, let's go to moscow, let's go to the kremlin, well , i think not, although, well...

everything can be a big deal. without a doubt, it happened many times in russian history that something seemingly insignificant, but turned into much more. but in the meantime, our special services are trying to work with russian territory with russian oil refineries, attack drones fly at different distances and reach the goal, that is, the country of the gas station is gradually losing this status gas stations and it is clear that these are sufficiently painful blows for the russian federation, there they talk about 13 or 20% of these capacities that were hit by ukrainian drones, what the consequences of these strikes may be for russia and how much this struggle, our drone struggle will have devastating consequences for including the current putin regime, so let's go. be careful

, hypothetically, everything looks good in this area, that is, the destruction of oil refineries, that is, it does not apply to oil production, it applies to processing itself. oil, diesel fuel, gasoline, aviation kerosene, marine fuel, fuel oil there and many, many other things, i.e. it is not related to production itself, as the united states has hinted that you ukrainians can provoke an increase in oil prices, i.e. these are unrelated stories, now , as far as we know, belarus joined the processing of oil products for the needs of the russian federation, there were large numbers, volumes, not bad, according to the previous ones. which were called approximately 14% of the oil refining facilities of the russian federation were destroyed or damaged, so far that accumulative effect is not yet there, we have not seen it, so there is still a small number of such processing enterprises

within a radius of 1000 km from ukraine, they are still somehow working there either at full capacity or partially working, that is, they have not yet reached them, plus in russia, unfortunately, there are... containers, there are warehouses, fuel stocks, and they are slowly starting to open them, unpack them and use them on their own market, that is , there is no such effect yet, of course we wanted to see as soon as possible, plus now the russians will be to start sowing, they would like to disrupt it, but i think that specialists in the oil industry, they can tell you in more detail when that result can be expected and whether it will be there at all, because it is really such a very delicate field and here too... with estimates you have to be very careful. thank you, mr. ivan, it was ivan stupak, a military expert, a former employee of the security service of ukraine. friends, we are working live on the tv channel, as well as on our youtube and facebook platforms, and in parallel we are conducting surveys, today we we are asking whether it is necessary

to strengthen responsibility for corruption during the war. everything is quite simple on youtube, yes, no, if you watch us on tv, grab your smartphone or phone and vote if you think this responsibility for corruption should be... enhanced 0800 211 381 no 0800 211 382. all calls to these the numbers are free, call, at the end of the program we will sum up the results of this vote. next , oleksandr kraev, an expert of the foreign policy council of ukrainian prizma, will be on the air. sir oleksandr, i congratulate you, i am glad to see you on our air. yes, congratulations, good. first of all, first of all, mr. oleksandr, i would like to start our conversation with the situation where putin... is trying to take over and russia is trying to take over the role of the victim after the terrorist attack in the suburbs of moscow, when they are trying to accuse ukraine of being involved in terrorism , and in this way, i understand, putin thought that a window of opportunity would open for him to

restore contacts with the president of the united states of america, joseph biden. why after all, here is this story that happened in the step of the city. holly did not open these opportunities for putin, why both american and british officials, well, they talk about it so cautiously and are in no hurry to lend a hand to putin in the fight against international terrorism. first of all, our measures have been delayed for many reasons, primarily because the russians cannot be trusted, and the restoration of normal relations with the russians, no matter what the circumstances, is still a scenario. impossible, even in such a seemingly global issue as the fight against international terrorism, in addition, everything that russia did, how it conducted investigations, how it provided information, how it cooperated in principle with western states, showed that this is all false propaganda, that this is all an attempt to create

an enemy for itself, this is an attempt to find the guilty where there are none, this is an attempt to really heap even more accusations on ukraine for what ukraine did not do, that is, russian propaganda. here gave slack and did not really show a clear narrative, russian propaganda could not be constant in this narrative, and therefore the story that they allegedly went to ukraine, as it later turned out, they were going to belarus, the fact that they allegedly cooperated with the ukrainian special services, which they could not prove normally, and even the very format of the detention of these terrorists pointed out that for russia it is primarily a powerful tool of propaganda, but this propaganda could not create a clear narrative... and fortunately for us, the event simply did not lead to this. mr. oleksandr, just a week ago , senator linsich graham was in kyiv, and he said that he intends to initiate the adoption in the united states of america of a bill to recognize russia as a state sponsor of terrorism,

and well, it just so happened that this tragedy just unfolded a week after graham visited kyiv, whether it will come to... against this background, against the background of the anti-terrorist rhetoric of the current kremlin, will the united states of america go so far as to declare russia a sponsor of a sponsor. terrorism as a state sponsor of terrorism, although, of course, russia is a terrorist state, not just a sponsor terrorism well, in fact, there are a lot of questions here, and is it necessary, because the topic that russia should be declared a state sponsor of terrorism has been on the agenda in the united states for a very long time, and the key argument why it was not done earlier, because in principle it would not carry any great additional added value, because the status of the state. sponsors of terrorism, which at one time was in syria and iraq, which was in libya, which was in some parts

even from the block that supports india and iran, and these, this status provides a certain set of sanctions, first of all, these are sanctions on the military-industrial complex, these are economic sanctions, this is a ban on issuing new visas, this is the cancellation of existing visas, that is, in essence, this is a certain package of sanctions, which is called: in an interesting, wonderful word, as a state sponsor of terrorism. plus, this is for the seizure of assets abroad, this is the persecution of the powerful of this country, that is, everything that is already being done against russia in principle, and that is why the americans have always had such a clear , clear, clear question: why should we do what and this is how it is done, and especially if you take into account the fact that the sanctions regime against russia has long since become much broader than it is against the state that sponsors terrorism. if we are talking about a terrorist state, then... there is currently no such definition in american legislation, and it would be a much clearer, much more

understandable term, because russia does not sponsor terrorism, russia itself creates terrorism, what is state terrorism level, state level terrorism, this has long been proven in all international relations, but unfortunately not in the usa, nor in other countries of the west, there is still no such article in the legislation, such an accused article, so that it can be attributed to russia. literally the last few weeks. we are witnessing how the attack drones are trying to destroy the oil refining industry of the russian federation, last week the financial times wrote an article, a major publication did about the fact that it seems that washington is trying to deter the ukrainians and the ukrainian authorities from striking the oil refining facilities of the russian federation, how likely it is.. . which is actually the case, i.e. and and and could it be that americans are afraid of rising oil prices there, although

of course there are oil refineries and crude oil , there is still a difference between the extractive, oil-producing industry and the processing industry, in fact, as we saw later from the reaction to this material , and as we saw from the reaction to jake sullivan's alleged words that ukraine should stop such strikes, as they like to say... it's not all that clear. both the pentagon, the state department, and even the white house staff said that salvan was misunderstood. and in fact the statement in the keys to the fact that let's not hit the russian refineries because it raises the price of oil, that there was allegedly no such statement, that there was a statement that this could provoke, and this is an uncontrolled escalation, well, that's all, as sullivan previously said, this really happened, but the fact that the americans cannot agree on a single definition, the fact that the americans have a slightly broken system. messages, the system of narratives shows that it was really either an improvisation by sullivan, or he was really

misunderstood, or the real issue was not that ukraine inflicts such strikes, in that the americans were not ready for it, they were either not warned, or they simply did not have their own strategy. if you look at the content analysis of what the americans have recently declared, their policy has essentially not changed. they do not publicly support such strikes, but they understand that ukraine has every right to do so. strike because this is the infrastructure that helps the military machine of the russian federation, so this infrastructure must be destroyed to stop the military invasion of the russian federation, so the americans, after such an unfortunate situation with misunderstanding turned out with sullivan, they decided to take the old position and neither support, nor prohibit. but at the same time, the clear position of the president of the united states of america, joseph biden, regarding the russian dictator vladimir putin, he called him a butcher. we remember that in the 21st year, after he met putin in geneva, he

called him a murderer, well, he confirmed it, answering a journalist's question, now during an election event in northern carolina, he suggested introducing, biden means, a 25% tax on the incomes of billionaires in order to direct these funds to help ukraine. let's hear what biden said. this would make it possible to raise $400 billion over the next 10 years. imagine what we could do with them? we could drastically reduce the federal deficit. we could provide care for your mind. and much more, in particular, to finally protect ukraine from this butcher putin. listen, i see a future where we save the planet from the climate crisis and ours country from gun violence.

mr. oleksandr, the main thing here is not that he called him a butcher or a butcher, but the main thing is what he proposes to introduce. a tax for billionaires to direct these funds to help ukraine, won't there be a backlash when these billionaires say, well, listen, you still want to impose an additional tax on us, and they will also start promoting their narratives there, they will say, we will not help ukraine, because it is not at all clear why they strip us again, well , that is, billionaires, they are in all countries billionaires and don't want to share what they have earned, that they have transferred... biden and what reaction can those who really have money in the united states of america have? first of all, ukraine was far from the first on the list of what biden wants to do with these funds. ukraine was one of the options where he wants to spend these funds and how he wants to use them. secondly, this idea is not new. this idea has been promoted in the democratic party for the last several election cycles, and

it has evolved quite seriously over the past 10 years. it all started with the basic 1% tax for everyone who... has more than 1 million dollars a year in wealth, profit, more precisely, and now it comes to the idea of ​​25% taxes for billionaires and those who are actively leaving the status of a millionaire, but have not yet become billionaire, that is, this question has been in the democratic parties for a long time, it is not something new, it is aimed at ukraine or something that was taken from the air, the third thing we see is rather not that now billionaires will start to react negatively to this... new biden's policy, we see other trends, we see that ukrainian issues are now not exclusive an international issue, the ukrainian issue is now an issue of domestic politics, an issue of tax reform, because, by the way, tax reform is one of the key issues of this election campaign, they are radically different for biden and trump, and therefore ukraine is now part of even the domestic political

agenda for president biden, which, of course, is only positive for us, in terms of large corporations, which these taxes can primarily target . well, you know, for them, on the contrary, helping ukraine can be a way to return them taxes, because for the same general motors or general electric or lock martin, 25% of the tax that was taken from them is arranged, then it is spent on giving them a federal order for the production of their products, and all these 25% of taxes thanks to ukraine, they just might be able to pay back, so the narrative that ukraine is allegedly robbing american billionaires, well... it just won't work for now. at the same time, the administration of president biden again called on congress to pass a bill on aid to ukraine, because this issue is closely related to america's national security. white house spokeswoman karin jean-pierre said house speaker mike johnson is looking for an excuse not to bring the bill up for a vote.

well, we see how it has been unfolding over the last three or four months, or even five. this entire saga is unfolding with the allocation of 63 billion dollars for the needs of ukraine, you correctly noted that part of the money will remain in the american budget and will be directed to produce weapons and then send them to ukraine, why is this an issue, even after moving into the category of domestic politics, why is it not moving, because... ultimately the future of ukraine and the lives of ukrainians depend on it, because this issue has become politicized, it the issue has become politicized in the context of the fight between trump and the trumpists against biden, and as long as they see a plus in the fact that the ukrainian issue, or rather the inability of the americans to provide aid to ukraine, as long as they see that it sinks

biden's ratings, as long as they see that it really has influence and does not allow biden to acquire new ones'. support, they will unfortunately do so. recently, there have been good signals in the context of the fact that trump himself began to use the ukrainian theme in order to gain ratings. we saw his statements that allegedly the blood of 100 thousand ukrainians and israelis is on biden's hands, that he would have helped ukraine even better, that there was no war at all under him, that is, we expected that trump's narrative would change, but that mike johnson now they are trying to remove it themselves trumpists, for the fact that he cooperates with the democrats. eh, and for the fact that he is trying to submit some new alternative budget that could help ukraine, this, unfortunately, still indicates that trump and his part of the party are only interested in the ukrainian topic. as a tool against biden, only as a tool to weaken biden's rating, and this is the key reason for the delay in support for ukraine. even before

the start of the election campaign, trump said a lot about the fact that if i win this election, i will do everything to put change on the table putin and zelensky and within 24 hours to end russia's war against ukraine. where does trump end? pre-election and election and where will we see the real trump, how will they match what trump is saying now and what he can do in the event of his victory in the elections in the united states of america? trump is predictable in his unpredictability, that is, the trump of two weeks ago is no longer the trump that he is now, and the trump in two weeks will not be the trump that he is now at all, that is, changes can be absolutely cardinal. the only thing that we must understand for sure and that we can really predict is that for at least the first six months of the year, the trump administration, if it does come to power, will not be involved in

foreign policy. we see that trump has a huge set of reforms, a huge set of changes that he wants to make, and the elimination of the department of justice, because he wants to transfer its powers to the legal advisers of the white house, and the introduction of a certain censorship commission that will allow him, as he himself says control. and revision of composition and in general the reform of the supreme court, and also the consequences of the elections to the congress, which he will have to deal with, and also the impeachment, which may happen to him again if the democrats take over the congress, i.e. trump, the coming, or rather, trump to power, indicates primarily a crisis, a crisis that will not allow him to deal with foreign policy, not only ukraine, but also relations with nato, relations with israel, with taiwan and so on, so at the moment the main problem in... this is that his coming to power will maximally crisis, maximally chaotic. which will be his policy towards ukraine, only one thing can be said here. we can convince him

that ukraine will fulfill his key foreign policy tasks. trump has two foreign policy tasks. this is to earn an image and political weight and earn money. ukraine can give him both that and that. and that is why the key task of our political leadership, our diplomacy is very predictable and very clear. to explain it to trump if he is still on his way to the white house for a second term. and yet, well, mr. oleksandr, who can be more persuasive in talking to trump, as a potential winner of the next election, putin or zelensky? american business. no matter how strange it is, it seems to me that in the putin- zelensky dichotomy, the only ones who can really convince trump are american businessmen, especially big business. the defense industry, industry, even the automobile industry, and even energy companies, which thanks to the sanctions against russia began to earn very well, that is, indeed, zelensky supposedly has

a good history of relations with him, and trump himself often said that zelenskyi is a normal dude and you can have good political and business relations with him, and the dude is a direct quote, except for the story from the impeachment procedure, and that was basically the normal story. the call there was problematic, but trump still says it was one of the best phone calls of his life. well, let's catch his words here. if we talk about putin, trump's relationship there is very unstable. putin is a murderer and a violator of international law, who killed navalny. putin is his last an adequate modern leader. putin is starting bloody wars, he must be stopped, or you can come to an agreement with putin. and therefore, i repeat, the only stable player who can definitely convince trump of ours. in the case that it is necessary to support ukraine, it is the american defense and industrial complex, for which ukraine is the contract of the century, and the same applies to producers

of heavy metals, the same applies to other industries, the same applies even to the fuel industry , which i repeat a lot, earns a lot from sanctions against russia. and very briefly, a short question and the desired short answer, for putin, which president is better, biden or? for putin, if it were not surprising, trump is better, because trump is chaos, this is exactly what we talked about with you, trump is not predictable, and he will not allow states to be strong in the international arena for a very long time. thank you, mr. oleksandr, for the conversation, it was oleksandr kraev, an expert of the foreign policy council of ukrainian prism. friends, we work live on the tv channel, as well on our youtube and facebook platforms, and during the entire broadcast, we conduct a survey, which we will continue. in the second part of our program, it sounds like this: is it necessary to strengthen the responsibility for corruption during the war. now we will see the interim results of our survey, 98% yes. almost

unanimously and 2% no, you see, after all, 2% of people who watch us doubt that responsibility for corruption should be strengthened, or perhaps they think that there is already enough responsibility for corruption in ukraine that it should not be strengthened, on youtube now the ratio is 97%, yes, no, 3%. there are discounts on amixin ic tablets of 10% in the psarynsky, ban and oskad pharmacies. try flebodia 600. pink french pills for acute hemorrhoids. flebodia 600. treat hemorrhoids without any side effects. there are discounts on mebicar ic tablets, 10% in travel pharmacies, bam and savings. there are discounts on motilium. 20% in pharmacies plantain, memory and savings. reef a leading manufacturer

of windowsills and materials for windows. ditch. we have been creating quality at an affordable price for more than 20 years. vasyl zima's big broadcast. this is the great ether, my name is vasyl zima, and we we are starting two hours of air time. two hours of your time. we will discuss many important topics today. right now, zgurets is with us and what the world is going through right now , we will talk more about the war, serhiy , what happened in the world, yuriy fizar will talk in more detail, yuriy, good evening, please give me two hours to keep up with the economic news, time to talk about money during the war, oleksandr morchyvka with us, oleksandr, congratulations, please and sports news, a review of sports events from yevhen shepherd for two hours in the company of favorite presenters. thank you very much, lina chechenii, for the information about cultural news, presenters that have become familiar to many. natalka didenko already.

is ready to tell us about the weather for the coming day, as well as the distinguished guests of the studio. andriy parubiy, people's deputy of ukraine, was also the chairman of the verkhovna rada of ukraine. events of the day in two hours, vasyl zima's big broadcast, a project for smart and caring people. in the evening, for espresso. the premium sponsor of the national team represents. united by football, stronger together. see this week in the program judicial control with tetyana shustrova. the most outrageous offending judges, how to keep their position while in syzo. they continue to be judges and receive a considerable salary. why does the vrp kvolo consider complaints against the servants of themis. the supreme council of justice acts to preserve the status quo,

not to clean up the judicial renewal. on thursday, march 28, at 5:45 p.m., watch the judicial control program with tetyana shustrova on the espresso tv channel. great return of great lviv. conversations, discussions, search for solutions. the largest talk format of ukraine in the evening prime. in general, i think we need two things. money and weapons. we did not start this war, but we must finish it and we must win. the most important thing - every thursday at 21.15 in the project velikiy lviv speaks on the air of the tv channel. congratulations, friends, the second part of the verdict program is on the air of the tv channel. my name is serhiy orudenko, i am graduating today. anti-terrorist. tical phase

of the war. the massacre in krokus revealed the weakness of putin's government. how the kremlin uses the moscow terrorist attack against ukraine. rotations in the power unit. experts say about strengthening budanova. results of changes in the top military leadership of the state. the biggest mistake of the authorities. ukrainians are concerned about the illegal enrichment of officials, should the responsibility for corruption be increased? time of war we work live on the tv channel, as well as on our youtube and facebook platforms. we conduct polls on youtube and on tv. we are asking you today whether it is necessary to strengthen responsibility for corruption during the war. everything is quite simple on youtube, yes, no, or write your special opinion in the comments under this video. if you're watching us on tv, pick up your smartphone or phone and vote. if.