did it happen in georgia, or in south vietnam, after the same, the same, not only was it about the limitation of the army, there was talk of the russian language there, denazification is still whole in the appendices, it's also there, the talk was , in fact, about including the political degradation of the ukrainian state and its sliding into the conditional sphere of influence of this ruskavamir or russia, what should we call it? yes, on a temporary basis, because if you don't have an army, you can't defend even that, well, pretty simple plan, now the question is, if jay divens is telling putin, you know nothing will work, we give you these territories in fact, we agree that ukraine will not be a member of nato, although in fact putin does not care at all, he does not care about nato, but that ukraine does not exist, but ukraine for you is that part of ukraine that you failed to conquer. it will not be possible to conquer, because there

will be such weapons that your army will simply be destroyed in 48 hours, there will be missiles, there will be planes, there will be tanks, and it will be, i don't know, like sweden, let's say, before joining nato , but sweden has a very strong army, and that's it putin, why would putin sign it now, when he has the power, well, even if he agrees that such a situation is inevitable, well, we are sitting in the kremlin with you at a meeting, a meeting. the security of the russian federation, and i am telling you, like patrushev, this situation is inevitable, volodymyrovych, early on, we will not have enough resources, we are forced to be with this version of trump evens, but if trump becomes president, in the end agree, well then let's fight , well, as much as we have a resource, maybe we can capture something else if we really have to come to terms with the fact of the existence of such a ukraine, then maybe we can at least capture the dnieper. well, at least the kharkiv

region, well, at least we, well, everything we can capture, let's capture, everything we can destroy, let's destroy, and then, well, we'll sign this peace agreement, well, fine, but why now, when we're advancing, why now, when we have a missile to destroy their energy, why now, when we can still destabilize their situation, why do we have to act on it now, i say that the necessary conditions are there, even to carry out this vance agreement , it's exhaustion. of russian potential from the point of view that they cannot go anywhere further, one, it is their understanding that their infrastructure attacks do not lead to sensitive results, two, and this is that they lose economically and demographically three, they are not us, and if these three conditions are combined, there is a chance that they will say, well , it is certainly possible to agree to some conditions, even to the conditions of a militarized ukraine, because what if we lean against the wall. so,

it's already ours, well, they took it if we took them let's fire at them, they still exist there with light and water and don't leave anywhere from there, well, well, but so far i don't even see such prerequisites, even in the distance, well, we'll actually follow it, and here of course, as they say, there are absolutely valid opinions, about, about everything, but... a couple of minutes of pause, and we will be back with new topics, do not switch to saturday's political club. in september, there are discounts on mukaltin, 10% in the pharmacies psyllanyk, bam and oskad. september discounts on rezi stol, 10% in podorozhnyk, bam and oschad pharmacies. fm, galicia.

listen to yours. there are discounts on amiksin ic in beresnev. 10% in psarynyk, bam and oskad pharmacies. in beresnev, there are discounts on linex forte, 15% in pharmacies, plantain, bam and saver. vasyl zima's big broadcast, my name is vasyl zima, this is a big broadcast on the espresso tv channel. two hours of air time, 2 hours of your time. my colleagues and i will talk about the most important things. two hours to learn about the war, about the military, front, component, serhiy zurets. but how does the world live? yuriy fizar is already with me, and it's time to talk about what's outside took place outside the borders of ukraine. yuriy, good evening,

two hours to catch up on economic news, time to talk about money in wartime. morchivka next to me and sports news. i invite yevhen pastukhov to the conversation. two hours in the company of loved ones. about the weather for this weekend, as well as distinguished guests of the studio, mustafa dzhemiliev, the leader of the crimean tatar people, is in touch with us, mr. mustafa, i greet you, good day, the events of the day in two hours, vasyl zima's big broadcast, a project for intelligent and those who care, in the evening for espresso. an unusual look at the news. good health, ladies and gentlemen, my name is mykola veresin, sharp presentation of facts and competent opinions. for example, if mykola veresin had done so, he would have gone to prison. a special look at the events in ukraine, so it is not necessary to say that the fish rots from the head, no, not from the head, and beyond. and then who is

china? me, my heart hurts. all this in an informational marathon with mykola veresny. saturday 17:10, sunday 18:15 for espresso. get closer to victory, together with the central security service of the asbu, join one of the best special forces countries we are expanding and announcing recruitment, inviting civilian specialists from various fields. experienced commanders will ensure your high-quality training and education. fill out the questionnaire and choose the direction where you can be the most effective. we are waiting for you in the team of tssoa asbu. together we will write the history of victory. details on the official pages of the sbu. free

political club, direct ether. we're going back and now we're going to talk about the debate that took place in the... this week, so between trump and harris, and that debate, as you can see, turned things around, in terms of to that debate that was two months ago between trump and biden, yes, if then, de facto , trump, again, according to the audience vote, won, now the result is completely reversed to ... what we had before, and what happened at these debates in general, of course, that both candidates talked mainly about the domestic policy of the united states of america, but they also talked about ukraine, of course they also talked

about, i say it again, the us economy, about migrants, er, about conditionally speaking, other social issues, mr. vitaly, like you evaluate this debate, compared to what you and i discussed here 2-2 months ago. well, first of all, i have to say that of course, the tactics that donald trump chose then in the debate with donald, joseph biden, it turned against him, because the main meaning of what donald trump said then and during the debate and after the debates that played a role, it was, shall we say, biden's failure, and trump insisted on it, and even those liberal outlets who demanded that biden withdraw from the election, that he because of her age, no, she can't lead

america for the next four years, and now we see that kamela harris is much more energetic than donald trump, that's also an important part of this debate, here she is. can look at him as a not-so-young person who, for incomprehensible reasons, aspires to lead the united states. this is one point. another important point is that ukraine has become the topic of these debates. in previous debates, as you remember, this was not the case, it was not such a topic. i think that during this time things happened connected primarily with value adjustments. because once again at the trump-biden debate. everyone was looking at biden's condition, not even at the content of what biden was saying. from the point of view of the content, biden had a pretty good debate, but everyone could see that he was not in the right physical condition, so the question arose as to how far this could be continued in the future. and ukraine, which is not part of this election campaign at all,

is important, it suddenly became such a litmus test, the very attitude to values, because kamela harris, she was not specific to ukraine, right? but she was talking about help. of ukraine precisely from the point of view of traditional american values, close to both democrats and republicans. by the way, she appealed to the polish population of pennsylvania, saying: "think about it." if putin wins in ukraine, then he will not give poland a normal life. trump did not talk about all this at all, and he, by the way, continues to stubbornly insist on his position that he will force putin and zelensky to end the war. he said it again yesterday in his statement. what he is good with they know that he will instruct them to meet and end the war, on what terms he never explained. but this point of view: let's just end this war, without... who is the aggressor, who is the victim, who is guilty, who is not guilty, none of that. kamil and

haris have absolutely clear dots over and, donald trump doesn't have that, he just has a desire to end the war, which is wasting money from the american budget, period. that is, this is such a pragmatism of worthlessness. and it is important that, in principle, to characterize donald trump's position in this debate, it is worthless pragmatism. but at the same time he was confused, at the same time he allowed himself to be funny, because here is this cat and dog meme that suddenly went viral on the internet so that everyone is talking not about the debate, but only about it, and it's bad for trump, because he looks like a grandpa who watches tv and then repeats whatever stupid thing he sees there, that's not a very good characterization, and imagine what it's like if you're a... young man, you look at trump, kotivisob just wants to look at some alien, some

grandpa, something like that, how did you learn about it from tv, not from tiktok, from tv, i watched tv, well, i think that trump was not in the best uniform , that's why at these debates, he was charismatic, it was visible, he was energetic, it was visible, but in such a way, this is the energy of a person who is... 78 years old, well, this is a positive characteristic of him, because at such an age, a person who is so is eccentric, so is energetic, it ok, but for what function, but we just see, indeed you are right in saying that those previous debates, which were before the official election campaign, they showed a tired biden and an energetic trump. and now trump just turned out to be the same, and what is more interesting, when i watched the debate,

in fact, trump all the time had the impression that he was talking to biden, that is, the impression that he is not facing kamala harris, but the impression that he biden is standing in front of him, that he entered, that he closed his eyes, he does not see that it is harris, and what is ahead of him biden, and this was probably one of the mistakes. him, although he really tried to keep himself in his hands, him, probably, his technologists tied him there, hands, legs, so that he would not rush there, as it was then, and as he does it during his, election rounds, but less so, that is, he fell into the same, the same trap, the same trouble that he was preparing, essentially for biden, yes, i agree. i totally agree with that, of course it is, and he's perfectly

aware of the fact that he doesn't want to see gaara anymore, that's a strong indicator that he realizes that he doesn't drag out such a debate, and why did he go to it then, he also had and by the way, before this debate took place, there were actually a lot of reports that his... headquarters, his party, his party members, his technologists, that they are very worried about these debates, and that they, as they say, are trying to restrain him as much as possible so that he does not, not to be aggressive, not to throw insults and so on, that is, in fact, his entourage knew in advance, and you and i knew in advance that it would be this way, that it would not be otherwise. he had an option in general refuse, say no?

he can refuse the second debate, and if he refused the debate with kamela harris at all, it would mean that he already believes that he has lost it. ugh, he went to a debate with biden because he knew he was going to win it, not a debate with kamela harris, he's not going because he knows he's going to lose. he could not afford such a thing, because it was an obvious indicator of weakness. now he can say: listen, she said everything that she wanted, i said that i wanted to talk to her there, this is a position that ... can be accepted, but simply refusing to debate, it was impossible, and by the way, you have to understand that this is a self-confident person, such people, especially those who have been presidents, they are... confident that they will come out and everything will work out for them, trump cannot to say: listen, you will lose the debate to kamola khairis, who am i, no way, i will go out and everyone will see each other, well, i have to tell you, andrii, that by and large, some big tragedy did not happen, we did not see a person at the debate, about which we can say, oh well, this man can't win the presidential election,

maybe he can win the presidential election after this debate, actually, this is my next question, because i remember... let's have the debate between clinton and trump and trump in 2016, actually, i'm remembering exactly the same debate, i remember it and there actually also viewers after these debates and experts and viewers believed that trump lost them, i don't remember the percentage points there, but they were almost identical to those that we have there something 60 to 40 was there. in favor of clinton, that is, can we now really consider that this debate is for nothing did not particularly affect the fact that even despite the gap that is allegedly, and by the way, and by the way, after the debate, this nationwide sociological survey in the 16th year, he clearly spoke about the fact that

clinton has a 6-point lead more than trump's also showed the results of the national vote, which he lost, yes, but he still, relatively speaking, won the election, he won the election because he dealt with these states, yes, and that's an important lesson, by the way, as you remember, at that time everyone thought that trump was simple spoiler hilary clinton that he is running, just to make hilary clinton a comfortable president of the united states, no serious. efforts, and only one clinton, as an experienced politician, said trump can win the election, understand, don't relax, he will win the election if you relax, everyone relaxed, including what seemed to be during the campaign in these decisive states, and now, i hope

kamela harris' team, she will take this lesson, not the election, not the debate. i apologize, they decide this election cycle, and only the elections in these states, if you lose these states, you lose the presidency of the united states, even if you have the majority of the electoral votes, well, then they will say again, here is the majority of americans, they came for her, so what , but that's the system, so you have to win in the system, not by how many... votes, trump never in his life won an election by the number of votes in the united states of america, which did not prevent him from winning the 2016 election and being very close to victory in 2020. so, what here he speaks, speaking, that is, as of now , the chances of the candidates remain as 50 to 50,

of course, 50 to 50, i would even say, well , it is possible from our point of view 51. 49, but if you and i were supporters of donald trump, we you were told that 51 to 49 in favor of trump, that's how to look at this process. if we return to the very content of this debate, trump twice avoided answering the presenters' questions about whether he wants ukraine to win. he says he wants the war to end. the end of the war. why doesn't he... talk about ukraine from the point of view of victory, but speaks exclusively from the point of view of the end of the war, because he believes that he has a good relationship with putin, he does not want to spoil them, he does not need the victory of ukraine, he needs , so that putin and zelenskyy agree on peace and that both are satisfied, if someone wins, then someone loses. he has a position, i say once again, if you look at this vance plan, it is inseparable from the chinese position, it is a chinese

position, we should not give vladimir putin feeling that he has lost or been humiliated because... this is our friend, even if the war ends, it must end on terms that will not give putin the opportunity to feel aggrieved, no way, the end of the war must be a triumph for putin , so let it be a triumph for zelenskyi, but in no way a defeat for russia, that is why you will not hear the issue of the victory of ukraine from trump, it destroys the very structure with which he hopes to end this war, it is unrealistic, but he ... thinks, and here's more one such interesting piece of information that concerns the post already debate, the headquarters of kamala haris actually launched commercials, de facto in support of ukraine. to be honest, in all this time i don't remember that there was such a direct, so to speak, campaign. and, in particular,

according to analysts, this advertisement is designed to attract voters who are natives, firstly, from ukraine, and secondly, from eastern europe in general. as far as i understand, the first, the first from poland. because it's because it's pennsylvania, there's a big polish thunder i'll add to that, poland, the czech republic, well, of course, that is, our part, this is our belt . but at the same time, we understand that the us has a strong position among eastern europeans who live in or come from eastern europe, and trump has a strong position among them, as well as among some of our fellow citizens who live in usa, to yours. opinion, but still ours by nationality, maybe not by citizenship, but maybe someone by citizenship, ukrainians, poles, czechs,

slovaks, well, relatively speaking, here is our bloc, eastern european, they, will there be a response to such things, to such statements, and will they still continue to... vote for trump and so to speak to him like that, they, they will divide, by the way, we will talk about it tomorrow in detail in the program of the political club with the president of the world congress of ukrainians pavlo grod, it seems to me exactly at 9 p.m., that is, in fact, in a day there will be this big conversation, i will also talk to him about it, so we will hear what he will answer. on precisely this question about the role of residents from natives of central european countries and ukraine, because there is a coalition of eastern

central european, eastern european diasporas, these in the united states, in canada, and it is influential, but think about it, you take a polish voter from pennsylvania, and he has trump, who opposes abortionists, but also against migrants. and there is karis, who stands for abortions, but for migrants and for helping ukraine and against putin, he is a catholic, and he hears what the pope tells him, he chooses the lesser evil, and here it is actually the same on the ukrainian issue, what is the lesser evil ? haris, who does not specify support for ukraine, but trump is ready to support it, as he says that he will come to an agreement with putin, take yourself, put yourself in the place of this voter of polish origin, how will you vote? well, maybe trump is not against all migrants, but for some reason i have this, maybe this is a subjective point of view, but

for some reason i have the opinion that he is not against migrants there from poland, maybe from germany, but you can feel some kind of kinship with to various migrants, for some reason, for some reason i have this idea, what is he like, i don't know what he is like, if you are from poland, you can't. it's just being a person who, who has different views on migration than trump, because you're a migrant yourself, well of course, well, just again, you're weighing it all up, trump versus a migrant versus people like me, but with on the other hand, i sympathize with these people, or maybe he does not sympathize, trump wants to negotiate with putin, it is dangerous for poland, but on the other hand, he is against abortion, and i, as a zealous catholic, am also against abortion, and maybe i am a young person, and for abortions are not like that for me. important, and what is important is that trump wants to come to an agreement with putin, that is, it depends on many circumstances, but it is a difficult choice, that is why we say that these are not determined voters, it is

a difficult choice for both a native of ukraine and a native of ukraine poland, why is it so important that, say, ukrainian organizations in america work with ukrainian organizations in poland, so that their cooperation is strengthened, i called for this even before... the beginning of the great war, moreover, i met with the heads of ukrainian organizations, of polish organizations in america and ukrainian organizations in america when i was in chicago, telling them exactly about this, that you will understand that we have some difficult issues between ukraine and poland, in historical politics in those things, in those things, but if putin... is destabilizing ukraine, poland can also feel very unstable, and what i liked is that all the heads of polish organizations in america, they didn't even need additional clarification. of this

problem, i am with them, i believed that i will be with them, i was the co-chairman at that time of the ukrainian-polish cooperation forum, and i thought that it would be much more difficult for me to talk to them than to polish politicians, it was much easier for me to talk to them, that is, it turned out that these people, of course, are ethnic poles, but they are americans from the point of view values, and i look at and think about these people, who will they vote for in this situation, well, in chicago, it is generally traditional. tical state, but they have this organization, one of their organizations in pennsylvania, for whom they can speak their pennsylvania compatriots, well, i think more likely than kamala, because if they see the world like that, then more likely than kamala, and along with that i understand that there may also be people among them who have some kind of conservative political views, who will say, you see, the pope told us to choose the lesser evil, maybe trump

is the lesser evil? well, there is a problem here, and again, there was no such problem with biden, because he was a catholic, the second catholic in the position of president of the united states, you see, biden did not necessarily have to appeal to the poles in pennsylvania. poles in pennsylvania they thought, listen, for the second time in the history of the united states, a catholic who meets the pope, just as a catholic, will be the president of the union. states, and kamelik harris has to find an approach to them, that's the difference, that's why i said, you know, biden can win the election, because in states like pennsylvania, where everything is decided by a few dozen votes, that's how the catholic community, mostly polish, so it can be, you already remember there, 800 thousand polish voters, relatively speaking,

how much was the gap in pennsylvania in... in 40 or 50 votes, something like that, well, maybe 50 thousand, i don't remember, something there was very small, but here the question is actually, the question of which group of voters will come to the elections and which will not come, which which is mobilizing more, and which is not mobilizing, so even when it was still may, june, we even said then that, in fact, even then it was 50 to 50, and in fact even then no one... could say that everything would be 100% trump , will it be one hundred percent biden, well, we have what we actually have now schedule, when the current vice president of the united states of america, kamela harris, is running for office, another phenomenon is taylor swift, by the way, everyone has repeatedly said that she is, will there be a moment when she supports kamelog, the election campaign,

she is in principle is a phenomenon in american society, because americans perceive her as a self-made woman, that is, a person who made herself, who has influence, who has an impeccable reputation, and in fact a person who has... a huge audience, this , if you look at the number of her subscribers, on the number of listens on different platforms, it's millions and tens of millions of people, and it affects the young audience, right? now the question always arises, to what extent she is able to mobilize this young audience, so that they not only say: "oh, how great she said there, subscribe, lady cat", how much she is able to force these people to agree with

what ... to go for election, that's the number one question for me, there's no answer to that question, we'll see, well, she supported kamela harris, and do you think it will affect the elections after all, if she really convinces young people and that vote will be affected, if not convinced, well, there will be, well, there will be another representative of such a creative elite who supports kamelo garis, most of the creative elite of america supports kamelo garis , you absolutely right, taylor's support is worth a lot to the world, and donald trump already said that she supported him, remember? yes, he said that she supported him, he even did some photoshop, i think, well, he generally likes to do all these photoshops, so to say, which are on the border with fakes, collages, i would say, collages are like that, and there are a lot of things.