i want to ask you about a senior pentagon official telling reporters, today, that the russian military has lost more than 10% of its combat power that was sent into ukraine, there is no indication that reinforcements are been brought in from russia. we do know that they ve been trying to recruit people into the military. talk to be about this idea of losing 10% of your fighting force. in military terms, that s actually a turning point. yeah, it s significant because he wants to see cities, he wants to circle cities, probably odessa, and they want to further degrade the ukrainian military. in every single, white rushes facing attrition, and the more it sets, and the more limitations they have. can they actually take big cities of kyiv which would require additional casualties. the figures we re seeing are been backed up by open source information on the nimble of
in every single, white rushe facing attrition, and the more it sets, and the mor limitations they have. can ashley take big cities a kyiv which would require additional casualties. the figures we re seeing - this is being backed up by ope source information on a number of destroyed or captured vehicles, all that s indicatin that russia is going to really struggle with further offensiv operations, for weeks and week of the time. they re facing a number of limitations at this point. the kremlin does a report o how many russian troops have died, they do give out numbers but they tend to be very low we get much higher numbers o the ukrainian government we had a very middle of th road estimate from u.s intelligence yesterday, a pro kremlin new outfit briefly reported that 10,000 soldiers have bee killed suddenly back reference wa quickly removed by the website what do you make of that these numbers sound really remarkable for a major, long standing army like the russian army
rights. so they would figure out a way to uphold the texas restriction on abortion but reject newsom s effort to restrict gun rights. personally, i m pretty cynical about the court, and i think they would find a way to strike this down. this does reflect anger, though, that democrats have over what s been happening with the texas law and how the supreme court has been handling that. we have seen other states try to take measures to enact similar laws. do you expect more of that? what do you think from a bigger picture the precedent it sets. the bigger issue is the precedent. newsom is getting applause for this. someone is using the tactics of the right, and it s turning against them. but it does present a problem because you have to ask what other constitutional rights can a state decide they don t like. you can see how this insanity is playing out.
to change these things is by focusing on these issues in elections and making sure that we understand that our fundamental right, our fundamental right to live, to exist in public squares, is what s at stake with these cases. let me ask you quickly, because you brought it up. the supreme court that will be making the first major ruling in the battle over gun control in over a decade, it will determine if this new york law that imposes strict limits on carrying guns outside the home, if that violates the second amendment. quickly, the significance of this and the precedence it sets, if the judges strike down that law is what? it s a huge, huge potential precedent here, alex. we have never had a riot that has been recognized in the constitution to carry a gun anywhere, at any time, for any reason. this case, the question before this case is whether the supreme court will overturn new york s permitting system and basically overturn many state s permitting systems that are similar, tha
the deterrent factor from texas and the idea that we re going to tell illegals, come on in, illegally breaks our laws, and by the way, we could give you up to a million dollars per family what kind of message of deterrence does that have? they are not explaining the story and probably want it to go away but this is one of many, neil, i think is a disaster for this administration. neil: i m wondering, too, $450,000, $350,000, $250,000, obviously there is a plan for separation. i wonder about the precedent it sets. it s a terrible precedent. in fact, neil, we know that there are negotiations going on right now with speaker pelosi and the democrats on the reconciliation bill to actually provide appropriations to pay