not to visit factories, limit yourself to three meetings: biden, garis, trump and that's it. but i would like to remind you of one important thing, we are talking about this plant, right? and i saw the interview of senator linze graham, i think, who said that the plant is fine, it does not cause real emotions, it is only an excuse for our irritation, because... it is clear that this is a state plant, zelensky went to this the plant, like the president of the country, who needs weapons, the governor is with him, this is also a civil servant, well, all this, so to speak, part protocol, that it is not known how easy it is to refuse this protocol when it is offered by the white house as part of zelensky's stay in the usa, but we were really puzzled by zelensky's interview with the new york magazine, uh, in this interview, zelenskyi ... . was quite skeptical of

donald trump's approaches to the end of the war in ukraine and disapproved of this concept of the republican candidate for the position of vice president of the united states, jadzie vance. but here again the question arises. then it turns out that the president of ukraine basically has to be gained from any assessment of the intentions of american politicians towards his own country. for the period of the presidential elections, and you can find out why, why all other western politicians can evaluate the words of biden, harris, trump, vance, well, the same viktor orban, let’s say there or someone else, they absolutely calmly comment on various statements of the american administration regarding the war in ukraine or garis' statement, it's true, and no one believes that this is interference in the american election. why exactly, when zelensky

talks about his attitude to the new yorker magazine j.d. vance's position, which is a national security challenge, to his state, he doesn't discuss j.d. vance's views on the situation on the us-mexico border, does he? he is talking about ukraine. why, from the point of view of linzi graham, this is interference in elections. therefore, a very simple question arises here, what should you not do in order not to inflate them? that is, at this time of the election, how can you think that they think that you are not annoying them, maybe you are annoying them by the very fact of your existence, well, that is, if we still take it as an axiom that the problem is not zelensky, not in his behavior and not in the protocol and not in the way he goes somewhere, and not to look for any unprofessional moments in the activities of the ukrainian delegation there or in the statements of our own president, even if we can find them, we can sit there and find and offer their assistance to speaker john. and if you still agree

that this is not the reason, but the excuse, that trump's campaign is simply based on the idea that he is the president of peace, and harris will be the president of war, and he said this at a campaign rally in north carolina, and he said it before the meeting with zelenskyi, and he said it during the meeting with zelenskyi, and he said it after the meeting with zelenskyi, so what can zelenskyi do to change this, this pre-election position of his, but nothing. that is, the problem, that is, the problem in essence, well, again, in my opinion, not even in them, but the problem in him, that is, in trump, in fact , it was trump who brewed this whole mess, and by the way, trump spoke in essence such that, in principle , it does not go to the head, and which is generally far from any diplomatic etiquette, even despite the fact that, relatively speaking, something could have offended him there, but for what the phrases are worth, there is no ukraine there. it is almost

destroyed, millions of people died in ukraine, destroyed, destroyed civilization, destroyed cities, in fact he said that there is no such country, well, i’m sorry, it was just a stream of lies, a stream of fakes, and these things are far away at all from any protocol, even, well, i’m not talking about diplomatic protocol, from any even the adequacy of flight management... campaign, well, why, well, if trump knows that the people who, to whom he appeals, they want to see such a picture of peace, uh, in ukraine and such a picture of the world in which they are, then he paints such a picture for them, by and large, what trump said is exactly the same story as with these haitians, who eat pets, remember? yes, he saw it on tv, you have to, you have to understand, trump is not making anything up, he... saw something,

someone told him something, he talked to someone. in general, this is how trump builds his information campaign and his vision of the world from conversations with by some people he trusts. this is what trump is telling, it means that there are some people near him who are telling him all this. he perceives information in this way, you will understand, trump is not a person who sits day and night with a newspaper there, the new york post or the new york times, and studies some serious news, reads some official memos, as you remember when he became the president of the united states, he even refused the reports of the intelligence services of the united states and said that he had everything. documents are not needed, he is not interested in it, he works differently, he removes some people whom he trusts, the quality of these people is already on the conscience of donald trump, these people can live either in their own world or be guided by some narratives that are beneficial to those with whom they themselves cooperate, and they are in his head all this

delusion is planted and he then broadcasts it, it is a reality, and by the way it must be clearly understood that when he becomes the president of the united states, if he becomes, then this will be what will determine his policy. well, i'm not talking about anything else, you see that zelensky is with him met, but can you say that he convinced him of something, no? trump continued to repeat in the presence of zelensky that he is on good terms with zelensky, and he is on good terms with putin, that putin wants to stop the war, and that this is a wonderful vision, and that this is the way to act, and it is necessary to understand that if trump becomes the president of the united states, he will clearly tell zelensky that he is on good terms with putin, and if zelensky wants something in the world, then he should... talk to putin, and with him, as well as with friends, yes, if they are on good terms, and all these phrases of zelensky that putin killed many people and destroyed, they somehow do not scare trump, trump says that ukraine is destroyed, so that millions of people died in ukraine, that in

children are fighting for the country, that this is a terrible situation that has never happened, it's true, but at the same time he considers it absolutely normal in this situation from a political, moral point of view ... to be on good terms with this person who did all this, well according to his own statements, destroyed the whole country, killed millions of people, even if it's a lie, but we're talking about now, we're quoting trump himself: he fights with children and the elderly, and he is donald trump on good terms with this person, and why? the question arises, what kind of friends do you have, but a good question arises, why this person, as per your own version, committed such crimes, should not be your friend, why you are on good terms with him, well, i don't know, this i also have a question, but if we are talking about the fact that trump changed his mind after all, that is in essence, trump initially, as they say, threw

mike johnson to the forefront of this election campaign, yes, that is, mike johnson did not make such a decision himself, most likely that this decision. to write this letter in such an aggressive, non-diplomatic way, regarding markarova, regarding the actual support of her by ukraine, zelenskyi, the alleged democrats, yes, this is in essence, most likely it was trump who was an accomplice of this, this is the first thing, well or trump's team, or trump's team, yes, yes, or his team, or that entourage that has trump, and then trump changes his point of view, still meets with ... here his technologists or his entourage suggested to trump that it is still better to meet and demonstrate that he is such a president, supposedly the future of peace, or is it just in trump has a different point of view, in principle, on something every day, because very often, and i honestly don’t

think, you know, we just very often observed that trump says one thing on monday, another on tuesday, a third on thursday, already on sunday the fourth look, i don't have any clear understanding at all, whether a meeting between zelenskyi and trump was agreed upon at the time of zelenskyi's arrival in the united states. you and i also have to remember that on the ukrainian side we have a team that believes it can agree on everything and inform about it in advance, because it can't help but meet with zelensky, right? we live here in the same situation as there. and let's imagine that they were preparing this meeting, they had no confirmation, but here in the background of the preparation of this meeting. that they asked for a meeting, there is a trip to this plant, and trump just starts to get mad, why do you want to meet with me here, and you 're stabbing me in the back, spitting, ah, i'll show you, and

starts declaring all this, it may not be a cancellation of the meeting, mr. andriy, it may not to be a confirmation of the meeting, which was not agreed upon, but what happens next, further on... but to show strength, but also nobility, respect for the one who recognized himself as defeated. trump is not just meeting with zelensky. he posts on his social networks. a letter from zelensky, who asks him about the meeting, you remember, right? this letter, which was sent by one of the ukrainian diplomats, on behalf of zelensky, to the name of trump, dear donald, we need to meet, talk, i really respect, all that, and it's as if zelensky is apologizing, admitting how great trump is, well , trump is ready to meet with him then after this letter, but i want to remind you that other leaders have. states had no problems and no meetings with trump, no one made any

claims to them, no one demanded letters from them, no one published this official correspondence in social networks, but the desire to humiliate in this way was only in relation to zelensky, to show that he should respect me there and understand how great i am, and who i did not lead, and who you did not lead, with prime minister of great britain. it was not like that with starmer, his team arranged a meeting, they agreed, they had dinner, with the president of the united arab emirates, as you understand, it was not like that either, he met with trump, there was a cordial meeting, no questions for him trump didn't express it, although all these people, they met with both biden and harris, so trump understands perfectly well that ideologically the prime minister of great britain is much closer to kamela harris than to him, but this does not help got in the way trump in great britain supports completely different political forces, he supports nigel farage, he supported

the most conservative leaders, i would say, inclined to leave the european union, nothing, he calmly dines with keir starmore, that is, he needed more than just to meet with zelenskyi, and to show zelenskyi's dependence on him before this meeting, and the fact that he can even say something bad about zelenskyi, call him a salesman, say that zelenskyi is about him... he spreads some things publicly, and zelenskyi does everything he will always ask for a meeting, he will not get anywhere, and this is also his, his behavior in relation to zelenskyi and to ukraine, which you just need to give yourself an account of the fact that this is how he perceives it, that for him ukraine is such a subject or an object that he can simply publicly despise and negotiate about ukraine with putin, he actually also talked about it during his speech. election campaign, that he will come to an agreement with putin, and he is on good terms with him, so he will come to an agreement with him,

well, as they say, we have what we have, one more thing is very interesting, in fact, you and i have already started talking about the victory plan , about the fact that at first it was very brilliantly announced for a month in a row in the ukrainian information space, they talked about him, about him wrote to the foreign media, spoke about him... personally, zelenskyi and ukrainian experts, ukrainian politicians there, yes, but really, you absolutely rightly noted that the last two days, in fact, of zelenskyi's stay in the united states of america, at least today, are already about the victory plan, for some reason, all these people either prefer not to mention it, or at least try to smooth over the mention of it, and at the same time, a number of westerners... talk about the fact that the united states was not satisfied, or the united states of america was not

satisfied here this plan of victory that white the house was also quite skeptical about this victory plan, in particular, the wall street journal wrote about it, and you really mentioned it, what was the point of going with this victory plan then, if you and i talked, and in principle before that in to the foreign... there was information that, well, we apologize, but all these points, they are practically unrealistic to implement, at least now, and now we are observing that we really have to bring this whole issue down, as they say, to put the brakes on, and now, probably, try already there is much less to say about this, here is the question of why all this was done, and the second question, after all, is whether on... in the future , in your opinion, the ukrainian authorities are going to mention,

force this issue, or after all, here we are let's forget about it, let's throw all these things into such an information dumpster, and let's talk about something next? well , of course, this is a plan of information measures, which seems to me to be designed not so much for western partners, but for ukrainian society, so that ukrainian socialists understand a simple thing there, and that's by the way. dangerous enough, zelensky will go to the united states, propose a plan, this plan is calculated even before the end of the president's term of office. biden will quickly give us everything we need, they can't help it and the war will end in a few months, but how else? well, again, when they said that this plan is a plan for the current administration, it’s just that zelensky wants to introduce trump, trump and garis to it, it looked very strange to me, incredibly strange, but to the people,

if you understand , for people who are used to perceiving the government's information measures as political reality - it does not look strange, and you can see in reality what many people say, listen, well, in a month the war will end, why buy eyes, inverters there for houses, why, why send a child to school somewhere in places of temporary stay, when in a month we will move anyway, the war will be over, you haven't seen, you haven't encountered such situations, well, that's actually, mr. vitaly, and is the biggest problem. that we are essentially misleading people in this way, i.e. correctly, we have been misleading people for 2.2 years in a row, so in my subjective opinion, i believe that it is better for people to tell the truth as it is, because the situation arises that then we fool people in something, they in something count on or don't count on something, don't plan their life correctly, and then get even

more disappointed, and you and i talked about it there and last time and the time before last, that... people should understand how to build their lives at least on three months, six months, a year, two years, if they don't will do, they will then face the further disappointment of being told every month that listen, that's it, in a month the war will end, in two, three, six months, well, it probably won't have a positive effect on the same energy efficiency there, on the education that you mentioned, on the people's lives in general, on theirs. planning, i'm sorry, family life, employment, their place of residence, and so on and so on, such examples can be given a lot, mr. andriy, the most important thing, because if i think that the war will end in two months, the question arises, why should i go to the armed forces now, oh, and risk my life in the last

two months, when it is clear that everything is finalizing anyway. well, that's how it is, but you know, it's from our point of view, but you can apply another point of view, as you understand, which will be that people have a short memory, especially during such critical events , and every time they go from faith, from a new faith at the end of the war to a new faith, but now the victory plan has not worked, and they are already talking about it they forgot, as you rightly say, we still remember him, he... he is almost absent from the information space. zelensky returned from the united states, talked with biden there, talked with garis, talked with trump, everyone talked with him and this is the truth, this is reality. he met with the current president, with candidates for the position of the president of the cs, which was supposed to be the political content of this visit, not a victory plan. it all just happened, what was supposed to happen, because the plan was 40 days before the presidential elections

not one will work in the united states, not one. now there will be others. important events, ramstein, the summit of the four, yes, the peace summit, for example, yes, now you can prepare the peace summit, and talk, there will be a second peace summit, there, remember, they wanted to hold it before the presidential elections in the united states, about they were also seriously talking about what should be done before the presidential elections in the united states, i also can't understand at all, but for what, and for what? and what's the point, but they talked about it seriously, absolutely, well, here's the answer to your question, so it will be a new information plan, and if we will live in this world of information activities of the office of the president of ukraine, and our main idea will not be how to survive during a long-term endless war, but how

to convince people, convince people every time , that it is about to end, then this... indicates that we are talking to people like small children, who do not need to plan anything for the future, who just have to live with ka in a fairy tale, and this fairy tale is the main thing , so that it does not end, the main thing not to lead to a situation when they suddenly find out that this saint nicholas does not exist, can you imagine such a disappointment, there is no need to convince them, saint nicholas exists, he will bring gifts, the war will end in... if it did not end in november, means it will end in january. well, remember that in 2022, during his address, it seems to me, the president first said to the citizens on the night of december 31 of the 22nd year, on january 1 of the 23rd year: well, in the 23rd year, as the 22nd can no longer be , i could not understand why he

it says what does it mean it can't? in the 23rd year it can be worse than in the 22nd and the 24th is worse than the 23rd, this is a war, a long-term war in some new year can be worse than in the previous one, why set people up for this even on new year's eve , but sometimes it seems to me, you know, that the president himself. believes in this, that we are talking about some information measures, and the problem may be in the reality in which the president himself is, that it is easier for him to be in this reality, that if he gives himself an account of where he actually ended up as a result as a person, i don't have mine, as a head of state, but as a person, as a result of the fact that he decided to change his career from an actor to a political one, it will be much more difficult for him to perform. his duties, because he will ask himself questions all the time, well, how did this happen to me, well, why, i should have understood it, and it seems to me that the president should

be in such a shape that he, as much as he can, as much as he is capable in terms of efficiency, so that he protects the state interests of ukraine, because again, we have you have no opportunity to elect a new government, so for as long as the war continues, there is an option that this government, even in an imperfect form, because it will exist against any government of national unity and that zelenskyi will prove... to fulfill his the duties of the head of state may last another 5-7 years, i do not know, again, i will not say that the war will continue for 5-7 years, but it may be so, we must again tell people that there are no political prerequisites for the end of this war they are not there, if they arise military and technical, then for this we need to do a lot, stop russia, survive infrastructure problems, create a situation where russia will not be able to economically continue the war. we from the west must create it, and it is not just one year, as you understand, and certainly not just one day, so this government must be effective, if we cannot, we believe that resettlement into the world

of reality, it hits the psyche of not only the citizens as such, but also of the president of ukraine himself, well, what is he like, i would say, a bright model of an average ukrainian, and maybe that's why people voted for him, that he is like them, and not like these politicians, whom they did not want to see at the head of the state, then maybe we would be more comfortable with you too? to tear the president of the world from his own illusions, it's just a question, i don't know, i don't have an answer to this question. actually, i also wonder why we constantly find some excuses, at least to talk about what in principle, in theory cannot be, or what will not be in theory, but unfortunately, you see, we are talking about it, by the way , one more a topic that we never discussed in the security block, but which is directly related to these visits to the united states of america in particular, is the possibility of hitting

the enemy's territory deep with long-range missiles, or any missiles there, 300, 400, 500 km there , it doesn't matter, but hit the enemy's territory, his infrastructural facilities, his logistical facilities, military facilities, i.e. everything that would stop the russians on the battlefield. this informative one lasted at least two weeks, again it’s still red tape, for two weeks we expected that there would be such permission, but we did not receive this permission even after zelensky’s visit, at least officially, and at least we do not yet have such applications, examples of such applications, still... and why in this case, biden is hesitating, biden is hesitating, the biden administration is hesitating,

and accordingly, the united states of america is hesitating to give such an opportunity to ukraine even now, is it possible that biden is waiting for the presidential elections to be held, i also have such a theory that maybe he doesn't want to do it under the conditions. on x-day in order not to give, for example, trump himself any trump cards in his hands, yes, informational trump cards, this may also be an opinion, or is it possible that these things will already be transferred with such baggage to the new administration, relatively speaking, to your opinion, we have been discussing this for so many days and still no definitive answer, why? we did not receive permission to strike on the territory of russia, which should have at least partially stopped the enemy's offensive, which we

talked about with you. well, first of all, me indeed, i absolutely agree with you that if i were in biden's place, i would not make any sharp decisions, on those issues that are part of the election campaign, if trump says during the election campaign that if they give permission to ukraine to attack the russian territory with our missiles, then they will thus create the conditions for world war iii, and i will save you from world war iii, then you should definitely not make any decisions that will support this statement, and by the way, i think... that when vladimir putin changes vigorous doctrine, here he also smokes in the american elections, that is, in fact, his actions confirm trump's words. so, at least until november 5, you are absolutely right, you need to get not only permits, but also any actions in this direction. secondly, i am inclined to the opinion that there will be no public permission for ukraine to bombard the territory of russia with western missiles at all, so... russian

allies do not give any permission to russia, we simply find fragments of iranian shahed or north korean missiles there, but no one in tehran does not speak up and says: we allowed them to hit ukraine with our shaheeds, on the contrary , the president of iran says that we never supplied anything, and we even condemn russia's aggression against ukraine, as masoud petochkyan said at the session of the un general assembly, let's talk , and why should ukraine's western allies make public statements. that is, such a situation can be, and i think that it continues to be discussed. i don't think that if this issue was not considered, then the secretary of state antony blinkin and the minister of foreign affairs great britain's david leminas would have come to kyiv, there would not have been this long meeting between starmer and biden, and ultimately there would not have been this dinner between starmer and trump. such issues are usually discussed during

such meetings. it's for... an absolutely obvious thing, but in any case , i assume that the final decision, if there is any, it will be during this summit of the four in germany and at the permanent level at the level of the leaders, it can be discussed there again, whether this latest escapade will affect the adoption of this decision putin, on friday, that is, in... i just specifically wrote an article about the fact that the intelligence of the united states of america stated the risks due to possible strikes by ukraine on the territory of russia, it is about the fact that just now mr. vitaly said that they would also including calculating, and whether it should be done or not, from the point of view of some certain expediency, there is the number of missiles, the possibility. targets with these

missiles, why the us intelligence supposedly thinks so, because russia has already moved some part of its aviation, some of its warehouses or something else, to a more distant territory, accordingly, they believe that, in fact , the potential risk is greater than the potential benefit, but at least there is such information. here, here actually, you can agree or disagree, but we 'll talk about it further, discuss it further, and for now, a little break, and you and i are back live on the espresso tv channel. wait. the journalist who joined the zsu is political.