point is making its way in. we will debunk this with facts that even your maga loving uncle cannot deny. that is all coming up on another hour of velshi. which begins right now. now. first, trump places an important and costly deadline in his civil fraud case in new york. unless the appellant court steps income he s got to put up upon for the roughly half billion dollar penalty that he owes as a result of the judgment handed down last monthe against him and his business. last week the former president s lawyers told the court that obtaining a bond for the massive some was a practical impossibility. 30 insurance companies were unable or unwilling to help trump secure the bond he um needed, especially since the bulk of his assets are in real estate, which many don t accept as collateral. two days ago trump posted on true social that he has nearly $500 million in cash, a claim that we can only take at face value right now. if trump is indeed unable to submit a bond and no othe
and is it possible? hamas is.is notjust people with guns, it s also an idea. it s hard to kill an idea, but it s turning out it s also quite hard to kill people with guns. china s economic woes continue, but whose fault are they? xi jinping, china s leader, did not follow through on the promise to take the state out of the economy. one of the world s largest countries, indonesia, goes to the polls, but might the result be dangerous for democracy there? this is a trade off that - i think indonesians are kind of toying with at the moment. they ve got stability, they ve got growth, i but you also see very little accountability. i before the hamas attacks of the 7th of october, the southern town of rafah in gaza had a population of around 170,000. now about 1.5 million palestinians are crammed into it. israel s prime minister, benjamin netanyahu, says he s sending troops into rafah to destroy the four hamas battalions which he maintains are sheltering there. most western governme
iran, while already existing domestic politics had a lot to do with iran s shift in government, many experts say that trump s pressure campaign hoisted the hard-liners to the front and the top of the iranian regime. so, when president biden came into power, negotiated with iran was nearly impossible. it wasn t for lack of trying. for the first year of biden s presidency, his administration attempted a resurrect the 2015 nuclear deal, but tehran refused to engage directly with u.s. diplomats. talk about stop and go for several years, then, something happened in 2022, which made matters even worse. the war in ukraine. you see, the original nuclear deal depended on cooperation between the west and russia. but once russia invaded ukraine, any collaboration with moscow was off the table, and now, iran is helping russia in its war. iran s attack drones are a common feature in russia s campaign against ukraine. the 2015 iran nuclear deal built at least a little good faith between ir
you have been watching israel s military assault in gaza from afar. has it unfolded in the way you expected? yes, it has unfolded in the way i expected but not in the way that i thought it should be. there is a huge tension between the way that i see this war and the way that the government define it, and the problem is, and i have said it from the very beginning, that this war is a war without any political goal. and what happens to this type of war, that the war becomes the end and not the means in order to achieve a better political goal. so the answer is yes and no. isn t the strategic sort of aim to destroy hamas as a fighting force and to completely eliminate it as a governing force in gaza, isn t that a clear political strategic ambition? no, absolutely not. it is a military goal, it is not a political goal. we have to understand that when we discuss the whole concept of war, the idea is to create a better political reality. the battlefield or the military forces are j
some time ago. you have been watching israel s military assault in gaza from afar. has it unfolded in the way you expected? yes, it has unfolded in the way i expected but not in the way that i thought it should be. there is a huge tension between the way that i see this war and the way that the government define it, and the problem is, and i have said it from the very beginning, that this war is a war without any political goal. and what happens to this type of war, that the war becomes the end and not the means in order to achieve a better political goal. so the answer is yes and no. isn t the strategic sort of aim to destroy hamas as a fighting force and to completely eliminate it as a governing force in gaza, isn t that a clear political strategic ambition? no, absolutely not. it is a military goal, it is not a political goal. we have to understand that when we discuss the whole concept of war, the idea is to create a better political reality. the battlefield or the milita