and now the time is approaching, 9:00, a minute when we honor and remember all those who died for our independence, because the russians came to our land, a minute of silence, we will honor the memory of the ukrainian military and peaceful citizens of ukraine who died in... the war started by russia.

the ninth passed in ukraine, the news is on espresso, khrystyna porubiy works in the studio. russia again launched a combined strike against ukraine, firing one ballistic, six anti-radar and two s-300 missiles, and also 25 shaheds. our defenders of the sky shot down 20 drones, five more disappeared from the radar. ppo worked in kyiv, kherson, cherkasy, sumy, dnipropetrovsk and poltava. regions at night, the russians shelled

a hospital in semenivka, chernihiv region. previously, no one was injured, but the building was damaged. the previous evening, the occupiers injured a 71-year-old man in the symanivska community. a residential building and farm buildings were on fire, the head of the region, vyacheslav chauus, announced. during the day, the enemy shelled the border areas of the region 20 times. a 45-year-old man was wounded by shelling on the border of the dnipropetrovsk region. the russians attacked the nikopol district at night and in the morning. four apartment buildings and a two-story building were damaged in the city. infrastructural facilities are also damaged in the entire region, windows were broken in one of the lyceums, the head of the region, serhiy lysak, said. also, the enemy attacked the marganytsia community with their heads and hit a car.

13 people were injured in the kherson region. the russians shelled 18 settlements in the region during the day. enemy shells hit the educational institution and residential buildings quarters - reported the head of the region oleksandr prokudin. 11 private houses, a gas pipeline, a bus and private cars were damaged. ukraine and the imf agreed on a new tranche. it is about more than 15.5 billion. dollars as of the end of june , the government fulfilled all the requirements for receiving money, prime minister denys shmegal said. after the approval of the agreement, ukraine will receive the first tranche of more than 1 billion dollars. this money will be directed to the development of the economy. kamala harris won the debate between the us presidential candidates. they think so 63% of those polled by cnn. 37 americans believe

that donald trump was more convincing. at the debate, the candidates talked about migrants, abortions and the war in ukraine. the republican leader twice dodged the question of whether he wants ukraine to win, but once again promised to end the war. instead, kamala garis said that it was impossible to negotiate with the dictator putin. let me remind you that the us presidential election is scheduled for november 5. "i want this war to stop, i want people not to die by the millions, we gave a lot of money to ukraine, more than europe, if you look, the number is huge, i have good relations with both putin and zelensky, they respect me and do not respect biden, and do not even communicate with him, we are now playing with fire regarding the third world. trump talks about ending the war", but he

just wants to leave ukraine. i met with zelensky a few days before the full-scale war. i gave him intelligence on how they can defend themselves. and yes, we united 50 countries. to ukraine , and if trump became president again, then putin would already be sitting in kyiv and looking away the rest of europe, starting with poland. next edition at 10, stay tuned.

this event was long awaited,

prepared for it for a long time, trump and harry met at a debate, whose position sounded more convincing, who won, who received more sympathy from americans, and for us and you , the most important thing. what did the candidates say about ukraine? this is svoboda ranok, my name is kateryna nekrecha, i congratulate you, we are starting! a few hours ago, the current vice president of the united states, kamela harris, and the former president of the united states, donald trump , finished their pre-election debate, they lasted for an hour and a half, if at first the candidates held their own, then in the second half they interrupted each other and even exchanged accusations, debated on internal ... issues, the economy, migration, the right to abortion, trump accused garis of marxism and said, that the democrats are destroying the country, and that immigrants in some states are eating cats and dogs. harris has already told trump that he is a disgrace to the united states and that many world leaders are laughing at

him. they also talked about the wars between israel and hamas and russia's war against ukraine. trump again repeated his already from. because of the thesis that if he were president, hamas would not have attacked israel, and russia would not have attacked ukraine. haris appealed to him, saying that he would surrender in 24 hours, and putin would sit in kyiv and look further to europe. trump did not say whether he wanted ukraine to win the war, instead saying he wanted it to stop and for people not to die. he also repeated once again that he will end the war very quickly. russia against ukraine even before he became president. haris already answered that ukraine has the right to protection, therefore, thanks to the support of the us and its allies, it continues to repel the russian army. it is interesting that at the beginning the candidates shook hands with each other, but

in the finale they did not do so. our colleague from the voice of america, maria ulyanovska, watched the debate of the two candidates for the us presidency in philadelphia. we will ask. in maria about the results and all the interesting details. and tell me how the debate went, is it clear as of now, well, who was more convincing, who won and what was the reaction to these debate? welcome to you, welcome to our viewers, the debate really started with the presenters saying that they hoped it would be a constructive conversation between two adults, and i think it succeeded. that although there were elements of a political show during this debate, i will say that it started with the candidates meeting for the first time at all, kamela harris came up to donald trump, to donald trump, shook his hand and said her name is kamala harris, and it seems to me that it set the tone for the whole debate in general, and we

we also saw that donald trump tried to be calm, balanced, but, unfortunately, this did not last long for him, camila garis still managed to provoke him to... certain emotions, to very emotional statements, to the transition to personalities, literally to in the 15th minute, he began to say that she is a radical politician, that she is a marxist, said that her politics lead to destruction. of the united states and such a policy can only be in someone who hates america, and at the 26th minute the speakers began to interrupt each other, but still still, due to the fact that there was a certain moderation of the abc channel presenters, they asked questions, they asked clarifying questions, they conducted fact-checking, nevertheless it was possible to achieve some kind of constructive dialogue and it was possible to hear certain positions of the candidates, in particular, regarding domestic political issues, because this is what interests the americans the most, but in general, it seems to me that kamalis managed

to reveal her political views more, to tell what she believes in, what specific political steps she proposes americans, and it seems that for kamela harris , this debate has succeeded from this point of view. of course, for the ukrainian viewer, it is interesting whether there was anything about ukraine that the candidates said? and about ukraine, there was a very large bloc about ukraine and... this is what ukrainians were really waiting for, to clarify the position of both candidates regarding how they plan to build their policy around the russian war in ukraine, and the first thing we heard - these are the statements of donald trump, who said that there was no war during his four years in office, which does not correspond in fact, he continues to say that a full-scale invasion is the beginning of the russian war against ukraine, and his voters, unfortunately, also believe it, we talked to them a lot, and they also repeated that about joe biden. did not attack ukraine, which is not true. he said that he knows both putin and zelensky, and he

is ready to talk to both of them, and literally with these two phone calls to decide the course of this war. he says that biden doesn't know how to talk to them, but he does it will be possible to bring both of them to the negotiating table and achieve some sort of peace. and when the presenter asked him a direct question, whether he sees the victory of ukraine in the interests of the united states. donald trump said that it is in the interests of the united states, ... as soon as possible to end this war, to which kamela garis replied that trump is ready to sacrifice ukraine, she told more about the achievements of the biden administration, of which they are a part, about what they managed to unite allies, to provide ukraine with the necessary assistance so that ukraine can survive in this war, and said that if trump had been president at the time of russia's invasion of ukraine, then putin would have already been sitting in kyiv and looking further at poland, at other countries, and looking everywhere... he could still to invade, to which donald trump also replied that you have to remember that russia has

nuclear weapons, and russia is threatening with these nuclear weapons, and the united states should consider that as an argument in this war. in addition, he called camelo harris a terrible negotiator. he said that she left a few days before of the war to negotiate peace between zelenskyi and putin, and she failed, she denied it, she said she did not speak to vladimir putin, again this was a ... statement that is false, and she also said that america should to stand as a strong leader in defense of democracy, and said that donald trump cannot be such a leader because he does not see in his role as commander-in-chief, that is the interest of protecting democracy in the world, protecting his allies, to which donald trump also responded, that he repeated his thesis that what will his policy be on nato, he said that nato is now being robbed by the united states and ... other countries should pay more, to which kamela harris responded that trump simply does not appreciate the role of the united states

as defenders of democracy. maria, was there anything concrete about the provision of weapons to ukraine, perhaps in larger volumes, perhaps it was about allowing ukraine to strike with american weapons, directly long-range on the territory of the russian federation? this is actually what all ukrainians and ethnic ukrainians here wanted to hear in the united states, we previously spoke with... the diaspora, and they said that this is their number one priority to hear, and in particular from promovikas, whether she will take greater steps, whether she will increase aid to ukraine, whether her policy to protect ukraine will be stronger , we didn't hear that during this debate, she was summarizing the policy of the biden administration insisting on continuing to support ukraine, but again she didn't say any specific next steps on how she can do that more clearly, stronger, faster, that is, you... it looks like she will still inherit the policies of the biden administration with the pace of the policies of the biden administration, for which

the american president is criticized, supporters of ukraine say that it is not enough, that it does not help ukraine enough help to win this war, but just enough help to last for a while in this war. it is interesting that, according to media sources, the biden administration finally presented its strategy for winning these elections to congressmen. war for ukraine, this is what they were supposed to do back in june and it just happened now, this strategy is still classified, but it is already some progress in terms of what the vision is for both the biden administration and him. true to the kamela harris administration, if she manages to win this election, on what the policy should be in order for ukraine to win, and that's also what she's emphasizing, i 'll remind you that donald trump said that it's in the interest of the united states states is not a win for ukraine, but the fastest peace. thank you for the summary of this debate, maria ulyanovska, correspondent of the voice of america,

freedom of the mornings was a guest. write in the comments, by the way, whether you watched these debates or follow the translation. in the course of the american elections, i would like to remind you that today at 4 o'clock in the morning outside kyiv, the debate between donald trump and kamela garis began and lasted 90 minutes, and now we will analyze them together with our guest oleksandr krayev, director of the north america program of the ukrainian prism foreign policy council joined our broadcast, sleepless night, sleepless morning, thank you for still coming to us for to analyze your main impression, perhaps emotional, did you see what you expected, or were there any turning points, unexpected moments? of course, we say this in contrast to the previous debate between biden and trump, or was it different today? it was really different, it was really much more equal, it was really a full-fledged, strong confrontation, and it

is worth saying, it changed during the debate itself, if the first 30-40 minutes were there. or more or less settled, we, by the way, in those first 40 minutes we saw a completely different trump, we saw a trump who, despite the fact that he attacks his opponent, as she attacks him, despite the fact that he speaks in his style, and says what he means everyone is used to it, he literally just repeated the key messages of his campaign, we saw trump who is respectful of the moderators, we saw trump who is holding on to the time limit, but already there, starting from the second half, well... after the first short commercial break everything started circles of their own. trump forgot about the time limit again, he shouted over the microphone even when it was turned off, he directly attacked kamala harris and he really said completely propagandistic things. therefore, in this debate, it is difficult to say clearly who won so far. we haven't seen the first public opinion polls yet, but clearly, and it's even visible from

the first headlines of the american press, kamala really forced trump to defend himself, that is, trump is used to it. to the fact that he controls the situation, that he determines what we are talking about and as we say, there were quite a few moments when it was kamala harris who took the initiative, and she, as a person in debates much less experienced than trump, can only be praised for that. trump has generally changed his approach, well at least he tried to do it, in an interview earlier i heard that he really, he himself said, tries to control what he says, to what extent this is his new image and these... attempts, were they effective in your opinion, overall, if you evaluate the whole 90 minutes? well, there was clearly an attempt, but the truth is trump, just like me said, around the 40th minute, he returned to his classical self, returned to his more provocative self, we suddenly saw this change together with our colleagues, when the conversation about abortion began, and when trump unexpectedly began to say such things that even the moderators

had to pause the discussion and provide clarification that actually what the former president is saying is not entirely true, let's call it that, well, for example, his statements that more and more states are allowing abortion after the ninth month, as he called it, by essentially, a child is born and she is being executed, well, that is, there were certain questions about the veracity of such statements, and it was obvious that at some moments it seemed to him or he wanted to make it seem that he was really speaking at a rally, speaking in that environment, in that information network, he was as comfortable as possible, where he is definitely positively perceived and where he can really say whatever he wants. the same thing, by the way, with the migration issue, the same thing with him calling kamala harris black or not black, it's not clear, and that's a direct quote, so trump tried to be different, but this effort ended quickly enough, as you said, 40 minutes, and

about migration there were things like that, that migrants eat domestic animals, that i am coming... to america, people with such a background are not quite legal, let's say, clean in this sense, but with regard to kamela harris, how expected was her presence and the theses she spoke earlier, and it was criticized that she did not have enough experience in international politics, for example, and trump himself mentioned that kamela she has nothing of her own there, but she is a follower of biden, or kamela refuted these theses during these debates about himself , so to speak? her performance was actually a lot more classic, understated, that's really what an independent voter likes, that's really what her voter will like, but there was one big but... that i noticed right away and that throughout the debate, well let's just say, kamala did not change, she talked a lot about the fact that she had a plan, and by the way, at the end she even began

to repeat it in a purely obama style, when new and new justifications are rolled out again and again that this plan will work, and refrenu medifraza and i have this plan, she spoke the same way about migration, she spoke the same way about macro-financial policy, the general economic situation, she spoke the same way about the situation with the migrant. but she didn't fully reveal any of these plans and the same applies to foreign policy, here she didn't say that she had a plan, but she described in rather general terms what her foreign policy would look like without any specific clarification. well, it is worth noting that even trump did not particularly give any strategic visions or his own strategies, but in the context of haris, everyone expected that it would be different, but with some clarity. we did not wait for such real clarity from her, maybe it was about a plan that was written about literally the other day, about what the us congress received from biden, for example, a classified report on the strategy for the war in

ukraine, reuters wrote about it, and will it be in this sense with these strategies, kamela garres, if he is taken as president, a follower of the biden strategy, especially this i will ask you specifically about, if we we are talking about the russian-ukrainian war, can something appear in it? there is new, shall we say, will she really be a follower? at the debate, she said everything about ukraine very, very correctly, that is, while trump simply said that i will call putin, i will call zelensky, i will be respected and everything will be very good, ah, she expanded a little in this context biden's approach, that is, biden's approach is such that ukraine should be supported to the very end. by the way, kamala did not say it in this way, she just confidently said that... ukraine must win, and we will do everything possible for that, and that whatever trump is proposing, he is proposing to surrender, which is not the american way, and she also spent a lot of time on that insisted on

putin's threat not only to ukraine. it is very important that they highlighted the threat to russia and to the whole of europe, to a wider circle of allies, and they clearly said that we cannot allow either what is happening now to continue to happen, or putin's new threats to materialize, i.e. so yes it goes ideologically, narratively, this is really a continuation of the biden doctrine, here you are absolutely right, but at the same time we see that it is a little bit expanded, it is a little bit more radical in this position, that is, there is this, you know, cautious hope that harris' foreign policy will be a little bit more an active, proactive, maybe tougher version of biden's foreign policy, but it all depends on, and i hope we'll hear it soon, who will be... is the national security adviser, who will be the secretary of state, who will be the secretary of defense, that is, all of these charis people in your team has not yet identified, and considering the fact that she does not

have much experience in foreign policy, the main foreign policy activity will fall on their shoulders, so we are waiting for now. oleksandr, ukraine was indeed talked about a lot during these debates, but there were no concrete things, it was not said, for example, which of the candidates was in favor of granting or not granting ukraine permission to strike with american weapons. on the territory of the russian federation, that is, no specific things were said, this is because the american voter also feels this way, it is not clear how the candidates try to take their time here, or to catch the right mood of their voters. well, on the one hand, we must say about the moderators, the moderators did not delve into the issue of ukraine, they literally stopped at the first question, what is your attitude towards putin and whether ukraine should win. it seems to me that the same, by the way, we will note about afghanistan, the same, by the way, we will note about israel, each of these issues was devoted, well, ideally, a small block, that is, if in terms of migration, it was three dashes

five questions, if on the economy, it was about the same cascade of questions, in foreign policy, they literally went through the key parameters point by point, by the way, china was singled out separately, china was a common thread in many other topics, so in relation to ukraine, well - first of all, you are absolutely right, the american elections... just deeper than general definitions, i don’t think that many voters are engaged in this, that is, i don’t think that more than 50% of americans there know exactly what the issue is now regarding the permission for ukraine to strike 300-800 km deep into the territory of russia i do not think that very many american voters know in detail what is the difference between the gvsm missiles and the metakamsa missile, why do we need not only the first, but also the second? here the question is really... a narrative one: ukraine is a struggle for democracy, ukraine is a struggle for principles, ukraine is a struggle against the age-old enemy of the russian federation, and therefore it is simply necessary to clearly know whether we are helping ukraine or not

helping ukraine . this is the main question, and as you said, the moderators of this debate didn't go into it clearly, because really, how you mentioned that the american voter did not delve so deeply into all these issues, but for us, for ukrainians, for the viewers in ukraine, this vision of the situation is important, and we have not heard everything from the candidates, indeed, but we will follow oleksandr kraev, the director of the north america program of the ukrainian prisma foreign policy council was a guest of svoboda rano. this was this morning, together with you we analyzed the debate between kamela harris and donald trump, join in the comments, write about your impressions and see you in the next broadcast, tired of a mess in the kitchen, constantly having to

sort through a pile of pans. to find the right one, you need the sejory pro kit. unpack the tv. savory pro pans fold into each other and take up so little space. and the price is only from uah 999. the sejory pro set is five pans from one to 9 liters with lids for any occasion. use them on the stove and even in the oven. pans are made of damage-resistant stainless steel. savory pro pans will serve you for many years. from now on, food is heated evenly. quickly prepared and no burning, and how elegant they are, concise design and such bright colors, and the main feature is the clever folding handles, store the pans one inside the other, no more clutter in the cupboards, sevory pro pots take up almost no space, so your cupboards will be in order always. collection strul savory pro. 10 items for only 99 hryvnias. call, sales progress from unpack

tv. drill screwdriver pro. compact, light, powerful, will replace a huge number of expensive professional tools, assemble furniture, hang a picture or shelf, screw almost any fastener, repair machinery and cars, and even screw a self-tapping screw into a metal profile. but it is not only a screwdriver, it is also a convenient and compact drill, it will cope even in the most difficult places, the price is only 499 uah. order now and get flat and cross hardened bits as a gift. a professional works. from a powerful battery built into the handle, and special lighting will allow you to work even in complete darkness. the magnetized holder of the pro securely fixes bits, and the convenient reverse function allows not only to screw in, but also to unscrew, even a very tight fastener. order the pro drill screwdriver for only uah 499 and receive flat and cross hardened bits as a gift. call! events, events that

are happening right now and affect our lives, of course, the news feed reports about them, but it is not enough to know what is happening, it is necessary to understand. antin borkovskii and invited experts soberly assess the events, analyze them and model our future. every saturday at 1:10 p.m with a repeat at 10:00 p.m. studio zahid with anton borkovsky at espresso. every week, the saturday political club helps to understand the processes taking place in ukraine and the world. vitaly portnikov, khrystyna yatskiv, andriy smoliy and invited experts based on facts give their assessment and forecast of the development of events. if you want to understand how our today will affect our

tomorrow, look at saturdays. club every saturday for espresso. attentive attention everyone. ballistics. urgently go to the shelter. you know, we are strict chelyabinsk people, and our men are strict, and so are our women, that's why life goes on, and we come with pleasure, you come here and feel like at home, i can't even, i can't even imagine that they could do that...