about anything, about, about the dp document, about receiving help from the allies, about, excuse me, mr. solsky. ms. larisa, what about you, because i was most captivated by this option, which i liked at first by the ukrainian family, that is, we suspect 200 million, we make a deposit of 70 million. in short, 125 million in your pocket profit, if you know how to make such schemes, always you will be in checkers and pros, someone pays attention to it, i paid more attention. that, oh, and everything is finally civilized, there is a suspicion, i i will stand aside for the duration of the investigation, the court will give its verdict, here immediately no, no, calm down, they made the bail, i am already in place, i am a minister again, that is what affected me the most, what about you, mrs. larisa, well, first of all, we we must understand that this scheme is not only solsky, there is a whole bunch of people there, including those bogus citizens who received these plots in their name, right away.

passed on, moreover, this scheme, it works constantly, we have a problem, we constantly grab one another, but we do not talk about the fact that in these schemes for years, for decades, a huge number of people have been participating, and even more, i call it, well , that’s my name, you know, the burden of a small person, a whole bunch of mothers with many children, participants of the ato, and others, write statements, allocate plots to them, because these plots are , for another. toshnyk, who came, wrote to him, they say there is no land, they get it, they get their thousand dollars, give the plot to a dealer and leave. half of the country is already so wasted in our country, and it is not only solsky, in us until we learn, because we need stop the schemes, and stop at the legislative level , as many such schools as possible will happen, and the fact that it is planted does not make me happy, because i do not see where those who took part in this scheme have borne responsibility, the legislation is being changed so that ... it was impossible further, but mr.

danylo, you often talk about the institution of reputation, which is so necessary and does not exist, in your author's videos, is the story here exactly about that, or is it a little different here? er, yes, i'm the only thing, before i answer your question, roman, i would like to emphasize that bail is not a measure of punishment, it is not a fine, so do, for example, compare... and talk about the net profit from the amount of damages, the amount of damages and the size of the bail, this is not entirely correct, bail is an example, he gave an example of how people are discussed, it is not, i also know these norms, but i simply stated that this is how people perceive such cases, well, there is no need to help them perceive it that way, i think so, but look, as for solsky’s statement, if from one on the other hand, in a vacuum, as if it were the right step, and so... to give a statement of dismissal in connection with

such and such a story, only we must remember that, in addition to everything else that you have already said, the same statement must be accepted by the parliament, uh, and if, it is not a fact that the votes for this will be found in the parliament, so if so, perhaps mr. tsovsky feels that everything will be absolutely fine with him, and that the parliament will express its confidence in him, and in this way minskhak will be around for a long time and there will be something similar to what happened on monday , and as on monday. they said that everything, and kubrakov no longer wants, and malyuska already doesn't want to, but they were told, yes, stop, we don't vote on personnel issues, you don't want to, you have to be a minister, go on, comrades, it looks something like this, well, something like that, yes, but in general, look, if we talk about reputation , we don't have this practice in power, we don't have this mentality in power, because on the one hand, let's imagine that even minister solsky wrote this statement for the best, idealistic reasons. such as

a conscious citizen and statesman. at the same time, we remember well oleg tatarov, whom no one released after nabu isab also informed him of the suspicion, because more in the eyes of all the honest and not -so-honest people, he was exonerated from responsibility as best they could. moreover, in our country, i know that i am already dealing with this story a little like a city madman, yes, but i just want to remind you in 2000. in the 20th year , olga stefanishina was appointed as the minister, vice-prime minister for european integration , who at that time was already suspected of a particularly serious official crime, corruption, now she is the accused, her case is being considered in the higher anti-corruption court, it is going on in the case of lukash, who is complicit, and despite all this, no one cares, no one made a big deal out of it, no... appointed her to

a position in the status of a suspect, not now, when she effectively negotiates with our partners in the status of the accused, that is, this culture... we don’t have any way to orientate ourselves, at least on reputational moments, we somehow only have that, only you ask questions about tatarov zelenskyi or yermak, or what about stefanishina to anyone, they will immediately mention the presumption of innocence, but people, we are not talking about a criminal trial, and dismissal from office is not a form of criminal punishment, we are talking about the fact that or we are fighting for some reputation and for some... purity in power, or we pretend that all this does not matter, so one separately, once again, just imagine that solsky did it for the best reasons, even if it was so, then one solsky, taken separately , will not change this whole practice, we need it fundamentally

to change the perception of reputation, and this can be done only through society, if this request appears in society, here danylo said the right things, i smiled something. to myself, when you said that dismissal is not a criminal measure of punishment, i immediately remembered, that's right, when there is a suspicion, the biggest punishment is to send you, for example, as an ambassador to slovenia, well, if there are suspicions, as was the case with the minister of defense, that's the worst punishment, anu went as an ambassador to slovenia, this is your punishment, oleksiy, look, there are two of you measurements, questions, questions, what to punish slovenians for, oh actually, poor slovenians, yes. but in this case, when we are talking about the institution of reputation, reputation is such a concept, first of all, it is ephemeral, and secondly, in the internal dimension, it is read in one way, and there is an external dimension, and here from the light hand of our colleague danylo mokryka, i remembered it, and now i will ask

my colleagues to prepare it and show it, because danylo told the story of the vice-president of ukraine, whose powers, perhaps, are sometimes greater than the president's, well, all of us. with you colleagues, we remember that tens of millions of ukrainians voted for vice president andriy yermak and for all his international, internal, personnel, security, judicial and other powers. and when i listened to danyla's program, i paid attention again to what is called the reputation of all of us and the country, presented in one bottle by one person, and this is not only about the contents. it's not just about, it's in one word, it's reputation, international relations and diplomacy - it's a very delicate matter. now i can stand 25 seconds for you, and for the viewers, and for you in our verdict program, 25 seconds for sure, vice president yermak in communication with

giuliani, it's fantastic there. let's just listen to how we are represented in the world. and if you have the opportunity, have your time uh to meet in ukraine and tell you uh, you know, know me personally, and we absolutely open, we absolutely work properly, it's mean that in any time where you will you will have opportunity , you we will be welcome to you to ukraine to meet absolutely in the level of the... i think that even people who have studied german or french at this moment feel spanish shame, because here english is at the level of how much watch forhu, and this is the person who decides security, diplomatic, other things, this is the reputation

of the entire country, the armed forces, and those who sit in bodies in restaurants, it represents all of us at such and such a level. mr. oleksiy, what to do with this, with such a reputation, and nothing, i believe that this is the least that can be presented to any official, i would like to hear how he speaks in ukrainian sullivan, i don't think he is much better, so again the question is, not only who and how we treat ourselves, by the way, today we mentioned sparts, which was brought up precisely because it ... whom many people don't like us too, by the way, yermaka zelensky, that is, zelensky is obviously responsible for what

his head of administration does, yes, but these powers, they cannot be represented by him, he has no powers, the president cannot transfer his powers, but it turns out that he did. no no, legally he did not transfer anything, but legally? danylo, how about you, you yourself missed everything 100 times through yourself. your opinion and mrs. larisa, it's just interesting. because here it is about reputation, and about image, and about authority, and about everything you want. who is first? well, let me be brief this time. if we take an analogy with sullivan, then the difference between yermak and sullivan is that sullivan does not try to speak ukrainian and directly conduct negotiations with the ukrainian side without an interpreter, unlike yermak, who does it secondly, strictly speaking, yermak's problem is not that zelensky can appoint himself. choose any head of the president's office, or in principle the president should, this is part of the mandate

given to the president by the voters, appoint anyone as the head of the president's office, but the head of the president's office with the appropriate functions, and not actually the deputy president in ukraine. andriy yermak, de facto , according to his powers, is not de jure, because legally, zelenskyi really did not give him anything there... although he granted him statuses there negotiator at various points, but de facto, andriy yermak is endowed with enormous powers, and none of the voters gave volodymyr zelenskyi the mandate to grant him these powers, and there is a problem in this, that our top politician in the state is a person who has no no even indirect legitimacy, that's where i see the problem, uh, ma'am. larisa, what should you do with this, because we understand that this is the most popular ukrainian according to the magazine

this year, the most influential, the most influential, yes. the point is that i still agree here with mr. oleksiy, that this is not our biggest problem, with regard to mr. yermak, because in principle, the president did not transfer any powers to him, yermak will not insert signatures on... in these negotiations, he does not sign as someone, there is no need to laugh, mr. danylo, he was not given authority, he was given power, and these are other things, these are other things, he does not sign anywhere, as i am yermak and the first one, that is, this is the moment that he is negotiating, he, who he is, it is not clear, he is actually on behalf of zelenskyi with giuliani. the cook could speak zelenskyi, could pokaivka zelenskyi, anyone could karlosonak come and convey some

conversation, again, again, julianna is not queen’s english either, it’s just a conversation, but the fact that yermak himself has the authority, as i wrote the signature, i appointed the minister for my signature, he has no authority, and therefore we will not present anything to him later. that he signed, that your signature is under an illegal decision or some illegal device, he actually, he has enormous power, he is under his influence as a matter of fact the state is functioning, but he doesn't put his hand painted anywhere, and that's the problem, you just told me, listen mr. danyla. listen, i'm saying that this is the problem, the complete irresponsibility under the crazy government, that

the fair, that there is no problem here, it really is, because based on that, so, what are you arguing about, i say that a person who has insane power, almost the power of the president, does not have the powers of the president, and is not responsible for that, he does not sign anything, he is then in court, like every official in our country, mr. danylo, by the way. in general, the law on civil service, his powers are limited, he will be answerable to the law, here a person has the power of the president, and is not subject to it, this is a problem, this is absolute impunity, i agree with you, there have already been problems with this in kuchma several times, yes head administration, first the tobacconist, then medvedchuk, now where are they all? and then we look at what is happening in our country, that is, again, this is a question for zelenskyi, he does not understand this, he,

well, the textbook cannot open ukrainian story, to see how it can end, yes, look, we have to finalize, because we have 3 minutes left, friends, here is a minute for everyone, because through this prism, this is the magazine of this most influential ukrainian, we got to the point that this is walking in circles again, because it was not for nothing that oleksii remembered, well now... it’s just a matter of time the last name is yermak, and before that tabachnyk, and before that and after him medvedchuk, well, we’re not breaking out of this closed circle, danylo, but one minute at a time finalizes well, why don't you get into the water? just changing names? we have the problem of established practices, and the problem of the fact that under the authorities, in particular volodymyr zelenskyi in general, and this was even more intensified in the conditions of martial law, these practices periodically acquired a kind of caricature scale, because

the analogy that you give with tabachnyk... and medvedchuk, you can also refer to baloga there, yes, she is justified, but yermak, he is a caricature of the influence that tabachnyk, medvedchuk, there or bologa had, and in what way we these practices, which with the help, not even the legal regime of martial law, and in general the atmosphere of martial law. strengthens, becomes established, and is increasingly embedded in ukrainian society, i do not know this, but we need to return to the fact that there is still a law and it matters, there is legislation and it matters, practices cannot prevail over the law, we still have a minute left, friends, mr. oleksiy, or

we must either bring practice into line with the law, or adopt a law such that... it corresponds to practice, or, relatively speaking, to appoint yermak as prime minister, well then he will be responsible for what he does, there is such a scenario that there are no opportunities to make such decisions now, there are, ms. larisa, you finalize, i believe that in this case we we have to talk about the illegal transfer of our powers, our obligations. from mr. president's side, yes or mine, can he hand them over to the ermak, can he hand over his lovers, can he hand over his mother-in-law to the dog, that is, what is it? we are talking about the fact that it should be a crime, you are in office, you have statutes, duties and you you have to carry them out, if you pass them on to someone else, it's a crime, that's how it should be, if

a doctor transfers his duties to perform an operation to his... i prefer a mechanic, then i'm sorry, he'll be jailed, but on a national scale, why is that, why do we pretend it's meant to be? but in fact, we are not pretending, but we just somehow got to this crime and punishment, crime and punishment, and somehow it turns out here that there is awareness of the crime, there is no punishment, well, three points here, colleagues, really thank you for the interesting conversation for our viewers, it was a verdict program, v she was larisa voloshyn, oleksiy mustafin, danylo mokryk, i also thank you... and the audience for your attention, see you in the verdict, you will already say serhiy rudenko, and i also thank you for your attention. vasyl zima's big broadcast, two hours

of air time, two hours of your time, two hours to learn about the war and what the world is about, two hours... to keep up with economic news and sports news, two hours in the company of your favorite presenters, presenters , which for many have become like relatives, as well as honored guests of the studio, the events of the day in two hours, vasyl zima's big broadcast, a project for intelligent and those who don't care, in the evening for espresso. verdict with serhiy rudenko, from now on in a new two-hour format, even more analytics, even more important topics, even more top guests, foreign experts. and feedback, you can express your opinion on the bad day with the help of a phone survey, turn on and turn on, the verdict with serhiy rudenko, every weekday from 20 to 22 on espresso. glory to ukraine, dear

tv viewers, on the air of the tv channel. the west studio program will analyze the most important events of this week, in particular, we will talk about the historic decision of the united states to provide us with the necessary financial and military assistance. at the same time, we will analyze the medium-term prospects of a protracted war with the russian federation. our guests today are: myroslav cheh, deputy of the polish diet of the second and third term, as well as the iconic ukrainian politician and diplomat roman bezsmertny. now , a historian, publicist, deputy of the second and third polish diets will work on espresso channel. cadence myroslav cheh. glory to ukraine, myroslava, congratulations. well, joseph biden made a decision, not just a decision, but a strategic decision, and here we understand that it is not only about money for... of course a large amount, it is about etakems and that the united states was already on standby, waiting for the decision of the last, the last signature, the last signatures

in order to start restoring the normal supply of artillery ammunition and further down the list, attacks with this is extremely important, it is not just about weapons, but about symbolic weapons and about the so -called red lines that were drawn on their foreheads in the kremlin, well, the first atakamsa. as the press reports or the media reports 100 range up to 300 km, the decision was already made in february, and they arrived in ukraine in march and were already used twice by the ukrainian armed forces for attacks among others on the airfield in dzhankoy, which is very telling, that is, we understand , that atakams, they should be used only on the territory of ukraine, including usually occupied territories, but this... if they are used in the vast majority and in larger quantities, then this will mean that the russians

it will be very, very bad in crimea, which we can only be happy about, yes, but on the other hand, this does not cancel a large-scale war, so we understand that may, june, july will be extremely fierce, and here is the key story, if we take medium-term strategic perspectives will be supported. on the part of the european union and the united states, that is, how far they are now ready to go in brussels in individual capitals, in particular in berlin, paris and washington. well, when determining how far they are willing to go, it is necessary now to listen to jens stoltenberg, the secretary general of nato, who stated that military targets on the territory of the russian federation, not the occupied territories of ukraine, are legitimate targets for the armed forces. of ukraine, that is, everything that serves the russian army on the territory of russia can be a target of attacks from

ukraine. this is a very far-reaching declaration, which did not exist six months ago, as well as the statements of jens stoltenberg about and the decisions of nato member countries about the nato military mission that should help ukraine. statement by es stoltenberg, when in... they decided whether there would be aid or not, that nato could shoulder the entire burden of aid to ukraine, and not the ramshtei format, which the americans immediately denied, we are the leaders here, but let's not push , and this only meant that the role of europe and the european members of nato, which in principle are the mouthpieces of macron, but also donald tusk, is growing . and to some extent jens stoltenberg, they stated that there is, there may be a situation in the future where the european members of nato

are responsible for all assistance to ukraine, which is not may not be gratifying in the context of what we have seen for six months in america, yes, but in any case we understand that ensuring our defense is not only about money, it is anti-missile defense systems, it is the systems of the patriots, and we understand that. .. what is happening now, that is, the russians have shown their criminal tactics, that is, on the example of kharkov, the same, that is, to completely de-energize the city and then try to turn it, well, into a wasteland, one patriot, one battery of patriots already, as i understand it, germany transmits, next is greece and spain, which has patriots, uh, they wanted some kind of enhanced guarantees of financial

compensation from e. the development of patriots and the provision of patriots, it will be, planes, i understand that the situation was complicated simply by the training of pilots, well, unfortunately, this process did not take place at the ukrainian pace, conditionally, the development of high-flyers, which took place there for three weeks and high-flyers were already ready with pilots after all, from the 16th it should continue for a long time, because the training of pilots in full-time mode is 2.5 years, and in fact five years, here in ukraine it will take place after a year and three to four months , i.e. it started late, that's right, on the contrary, it's going at a rapid pace, it's going at a rapid pace, but still slowly, so we understand that russia is training its troops, russia is preparing additional resources, not only manpower, yes, but technical resources. and we understand that russia has set itself the goal of a long war, a protracted war, and currently they are proactive, that is, they show

aggression as soon as we get atacoms. the situation may change, but in any case, everyone was very worried when president macron started talking about the front line that could run along the dnieper, and accordingly, how the vision of what needs to be done and what they are willing to do has changed our diverse allies, friends, and so on, fear that russia has armed itself to the teeth and is ready to reach the english channel, if there is no... unification of nato and a strengthened restoration of the capabilities of european nato countries and so on, it is all behind us. the situation at the front, as ukrainians, experts, and the military say, is not as tragic as it might seem. to them, i understand, with all my support and everything, all the feelings that can be expressed to the residents of kharkiv, who are a target every day, for the attacks of those terrorist attacks from russia. but to take

such a city as kharkiv, this is what i understand, all military experts say that it would require several hundred thousand, thousands of russian hordes, the group took avdiivka russian, which numbered more than 80 thousand soldiers, and it took them many months there, and even in the raid itself they say that if there had been a supply of shells, artillery shells earlier, then avdiivka would never have been taken, even jack sullivan said so. and this is our leading dove of peace and everything else in america and so on, and he said that if you had given help earlier, then avdiivka would not have fallen, well, but avdiivka has fallen and now it is about holding the front line, that i i mean, it's a war attrition, in fact it may seem to the russians that they are winning, but this is far from the case, because the americans and...

europeans also have an understanding of several factors: first, russia cannot win a war of attrition by definition, it confrontation with nato, that is, with the european union, the united states, and canada, is too weak. this is clear. moreover, the potential of europe itself both in the defense sphere and in the military, already in the narrower sense, that is , both aircraft and artillery, and the armed forces themselves, the military, yes. further can resist in russia, and russia is not prepared for a conditional attack against nato, it has been fighting against ukraine for more than 10 years, let's not forget that this is a war, well , it's a question of the level of intensity of the fighting, and now we see that the level of intensity is not decreasing, only gradually, it is gradually being added, although it is just there in some areas of the front, it is so, therefore, first of all

, it cannot potentially be compared to a war of attrition for the russians. will not win, this is, firstly, secondly, in the long-term perspective, and this process has already begun, the west has switched its attention not only to the provision of weapons, money of ukraine, but also by restoring ukraine's economic potential and defense potential. now they are going, well, as i understand it, because some cases are secret, of course, but extensive work is underway to restore the work of ukrainian defense plants, production and shells. and everything else, it can be understood from the speech of american officials that now america and europe will do everything to ensure that ukraine stands very firmly on its feet, so the transfer of atakamsya, i calculate, of course, that this is the repelling of russian planes with cabs and so on, but in reality it is about crimea, about novorossiysk, about the black sea fleet, that is, ensuring the security of odessa. and

black sea ships, so that ukraine has an open window for export, import, export of its products and import of products from the world, that is, to be an economically capable state, the military goals now, as i understand it, are for ukraine to align the front line and gain capabilities, to inflict such losses on the russians that they will not have the opportunity to compensate them, that's how everyone is now. military experts say the russians are somewhere about 30-40,000 troops are mobilized every month, somewhere around 25-30,000 are destroyed, and it is about their losses being greater than the possibilities of mobilization, and this is what we are talking about now, and the third factor, which we do not can be omitted absolutely, this is what the americans are already directly declaring and...