There are no estimates that 1.5 million Russian soldiers have been killed and wounded since Russia invaded Ukraine. Recent analyses suggest manpower losses of around 780,000 as of early January 2025. Ukrainian government estimates from February 2025 claim 850,000 Russian troop losses. While the Ukrainian government is thought to have overcounted Russian losses and undercounted its own, some of its recent assessments have been similar to those by government and expert analyses outside of Kyiv. An independent analyst told Newsweek that Trump’s estimate of Russian losses had “no basis in reality.”

On Jan. 27, Andrey Isayev, a member of Russia’s State Duma (the lower house of parliament), accused U.S. President Donald Trump of trying to “rudely” force Russian President Vladimir Putin to start peace negotiations with Ukraine. […] “Trump threatened our president rather rudely, it must be said, pressuring to start the negotiations and reminding of Qaddafi’s fate.” The claim is false.

On February 2, President Volodymyr Zelensky of Ukraine said he had only received $75 billion of the $175 billion the United States had spent on Ukraine. The cry went up, what happened to the other $100 billion? Was it lost or stolen? The answer is no. Only part of the aid goes through Ukrainian control. A large part pays for activities as a result of the war but not to Ukraine directly. These include the United States training of Ukrainian forces, global humanitarian assistance, additional costs of U.S. surge forces in Europe, and intelligence support for both NATO and Ukraine. As CSIS has reported before, “aid to Ukraine” is a misnomer because 90 percent of military aid is spent in the United States. Of aid overall, 60 percent is spent in the United States, about 25 percent is spent in Ukraine, and the final 15 percent is spent globally.

Our rating: Manipulated media The video is a fabrication that wasn’t reported or published by E! News, a company spokesperson said. The video is consistent with material created by a Russia-aligned influence campaign, disinformation experts said.

On February 2, President Volodymyr Zelensky of Ukraine said he had only received $75 billion of the $175 billion the United States had spent on Ukraine. The cry went up, what happened to the other $100 billion? Was it lost or stolen? The answer is no. Only part of the aid goes through Ukrainian control. A large part pays for activities as a result of the war but not to Ukraine directly. These include the United States training of Ukrainian forces, global humanitarian assistance, additional costs of U.S. surge forces in Europe, and intelligence support for both NATO and Ukraine. As CSIS has reported before, “aid to Ukraine” is a misnomer because 90 percent of military aid is spent in the United States. Of aid overall, 60 percent is spent in the United States, about 25 percent is spent in Ukraine, and the final 15 percent is spent globally.

WHAT WAS CLAIMED: E! News published a video stating celebrities received funds from USAID to visit Ukraine. OUR VERDICT: False. The video is fake and there’s no evidence USAID funded the visits.

The E!News portal never published such a story, and the widely circulated news is fake, debunked by both the media and the celebrities who visited Ukraine.

Elon Musk, Donald Trump Jr and other prominent conservatives are sharing a video that claims to show E! News reporting that the US’s humanitarian agency paid millions of dollars to celebrities including Angelina Jolie and Ben Stiller to visit Ukraine and help boost President Volodymyr Zelensky’s popularity amid the country’s war with Russia. But the clip is not an authentic report, a spokesperson for the entertainment news channel told AFP, and Stiller has publicly rejected the allegations as false.

Much of the money the U.S. has dedicated for Ukraine aid is spent in the U.S. on domestic weapons manufacturers and U.S. military and government operations. Direct military support to Ukraine totaled about $70 billion out of the $175 billion Congress has appropriated. The money isn’t being laundered, it’s being spent as Congress intended.

The claim that the LA Fire Department (LAFD) was impacted in its ability to fight the recent wildfires due to its donations to Ukraine was also promoted by writer and entrepreneur John LeFevre (archived here), who linked donations to Ukraine to current resource shortages. In March 2022, during the early stages of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, fire departments across California, including Los Angeles County, donated some surplus equipment sitting in storage, including hoses, nozzles, helmets, gloves, boots, and other personal protective gear, as well as medical supplies. The donation did not include any critical equipment or heavy machinery. There is no suggestion that the previous donations to Ukraine have impacted this particular situation.

This is not a genuine cover of The Economist. It has not been shared on the publication’s archive of past editions, or elsewhere on its website. The Economist edition for 24 February 2024 did feature a different illustration of President Putin and Mr Trump with the title ‘Is Europe ready?’

This is not a genuine cover of The Economist. It has not been shared on the publication’s archive of past editions, or elsewhere on its website. The Economist edition for 24 February 2024 did feature a different illustration of President Putin and Mr Trump with the title ‘Is Europe ready?’

This is not a genuine cover of The Economist. It has not been shared on the publication’s archive of past editions, or elsewhere on its website. The Economist edition for 24 February 2024 did feature a different illustration of President Putin and Mr Trump with the title ‘Is Europe ready?’

This is not a genuine cover of The Economist. It has not been shared on the publication’s archive of past editions, or elsewhere on its website. The Economist edition for 24 February 2024 did feature a different illustration of President Putin and Mr Trump with the title ‘Is Europe ready?’

A spokesperson for the organisation told Full Fact: “This is a bogus claim. Secretary General Rutte has never said this.” They also pointed us towards the Secretary General’s most recent remarks made to the media about President-elect Trump, congratulating him on his election victory and praising him for getting NATO countries to spend more on defence during his first presidency beyond two percent of the GDP target.

This quote is not real, however. There is no proof that Rutte has ever said or implied that he would expel the U.S. from NATO, and Rutte congratulated the incoming President on his victory in a post on X just two days after Election Day.

NATO spokesperson Daniele Riggio told PolitiFact the claim is “bogus.” “Secretary General Rutte has never said this,” Riggio said. This post was flagged as part of Meta’s efforts to combat false news and misinformation on its News Feed.

Rubio has commented on the need for a pragmatic approach to end the Ukraine conflict, but he hasn’t suggested allowing Russia to control Ukrainian territory as a solution. During a recent interview on NBC’s Meet the Press and on the Today Show, Rubio said the war appears to be in a “stalemate” and argued for a negotiated settlement as a realistic path to peace. He highlighted the bravery of Ukrainians but expressed concern about the U.S. funding a prolonged conflict, suggesting that a practical end to the hostilities should be prioritized to prevent further destruction and economic strain on Ukraine.

There was no real evidence of Rutte making the statement, which would have generated news headlines if he had actually said it. The quote was fabricated. A NATO spokesperson said the claim was “bogus.”

There is no evidence that a Ukrainian F-16 shot down a Russian Su-24 or any other Russian military aircraft. The Kyiv Post reported that Ukrainian media has said such reports have been unconfirmed and with the exception of a singular Russian Telegram channel, most Russian sources have been silent or denied the claim.