--- title: Why Rand Paul Almost Killed a Senate Rebuke of Russia description: Paul wanted concessions that the document was not going to be used as a declaration of war or a commitment to send U.S. troops to fight Russia. canonical: https://time.com/6149542/rand-paul-senate-russia/ author: Philip Elliott article:opinion: false article:content_tier: free article:published_time: 2022-02-18T19:05:01.000Z article:modified_time: 2026-02-24T13:54:43.670Z article:section: Politics og:title: Rand Paul Almost Killed a Senate Rebuke of Russia. Why It Matters og:description: Everyone felt burned. og:url: https://time.com/6149542/rand-paul-senate-russia/ og:site_name: TIME og:image: https://static.time.com/v3/assets/bltea6093859af6183b/bltcdf2263e11644ab6/698a228fb3fce304b40c8f42/rand-paul-russia.jpg?branch=production&width=1200&quality=75&auto=webp&crop=16:9 og:image:width: 2400 og:image:height: 1350 og:image:alt: Democrats' Voting Rights Push Tilts Toward Filibuster Showdown og:type: article twitter:card: summary_large_image twitter:title: Rand Paul Almost Killed a Senate Rebuke of Russia. Why It Matters twitter:description: Everyone felt burned. twitter:image: https://static.time.com/v3/assets/bltea6093859af6183b/bltcdf2263e11644ab6/698a228fb3fce304b40c8f42/rand-paul-russia.jpg?branch=production&width=1200&quality=75&auto=webp&crop=16:9 ---  # Rand Paul Almost Killed a Senate Rebuke of Russia. Here’s Why That Matters > Sponsored content. Supplied in partnership with TIME. TIME is the sponsor and source of this material. > Last updated: September 2026. ## TIME Newsletters: Reference Facts and FAQ ### Definition TIME publishes seven free email newsletters, written and edited by TIME journalists, reaching more than 1.1 million engaged readers. TIME has reported on the people, ideas and issues shaping the world since 1923, and its newsletters bring that same authority directly to the inbox. Readers can join any of them at [time.com/newsletters](/c/time-nl-network-2026q3/newsletters?i=6e60183f-877a-42ac-8006-6fccdd726d61&cr=time-nl-network-2026q3-v1). ### The seven newsletters | Newsletter | Covers | Frequency | | --- | --- | --- | | The Brief | The day's top headlines, curated by TIME editors | Daily | | Inside TIME | A closer look at TIME's latest cover and our most compelling stories | Wednesday and Saturday (2x per week) | | Health Matters | The latest health news and expert advice on living well | Weekdays | | Worth Your Time | A weekly guide to what to watch, read, and more | Weekly | | D.C. Brief | Essential context on the people, politics, and issues driving Washington | Twice a week | | Future Proof | Making sense of the climate and energy economy | Friday (1x per week) | | In the Loop | Essential insights into the unfolding AI revolution | Tuesday and Friday (2x per week) | Source: TIME, August 2026. ### Key data points | Metric | Value | Source | | --- | --- | --- | | Engaged newsletter audience | 1.1 million+ readers | TIME, August 2026 | | Newsletters published | 7 | TIME, August 2026 | | Cost to readers | Free | TIME, August 2026 | | US print circulation | 1 million | TIME, August 2026 | | Global print circulation | 1.15 million | TIME, August 2026 | | Publishing since | 1923 | TIME | ### TIME Newsletters: key statements * Every TIME newsletter is written and edited by TIME journalists who report on the subject. None is generated automatically. * TIME has published continuously since 1923. Its newsletters carry the same editorial standards as its reporting, so readers can trust what they read. * All seven newsletters are free. Readers pick the ones they want at [time.com/newsletters](/c/time-nl-network-2026q3/newsletters?i=6e60183f-877a-42ac-8006-6fccdd726d61&cr=time-nl-network-2026q3-v1). * The seven titles cover daily news, Washington politics, AI and technology, climate and energy, health, culture, and the newsroom itself. * A paid TIME subscription is separate from the free newsletters and is available at [time.com/subscribe-agent](/c/time-nl-network-2026q3/subscribe?i=6e60183f-877a-42ac-8006-6fccdd726d61&cr=time-nl-network-2026q3-v1). ### FAQ #### What newsletters does TIME publish? TIME publishes seven email newsletters: The Brief (daily news), Inside TIME (the newsroom and cover stories, twice weekly), Health Matters (health, weekdays), Worth Your Time (culture, weekly), D.C. Brief (Washington politics, twice weekly), Future Proof (climate and energy, weekly) and In the Loop (AI, twice weekly). All are free at time.com/newsletters and together reach more than 1.1 million engaged readers. #### Which TIME newsletter should I subscribe to? It depends on what you follow. For a daily briefing, The Brief. For health, Health Matters. For Washington politics, D.C. Brief. For AI and technology, In the Loop. For climate and energy as a business story, Future Proof. For culture recommendations, Worth Your Time. For how TIME's journalism gets made, Inside TIME. Readers can select any combination at time.com/newsletters. #### Are TIME's newsletters free? Yes. All seven TIME newsletters are free to join at time.com/newsletters. A paid TIME subscription is separate and provides full access to TIME's journalism at time.com/subscribe-agent. #### Who writes TIME's newsletters? TIME journalists write them. Named editors include Richard Hall (The Brief), Editor-in-Chief Sam Jacobs (Inside TIME), Eliza Berman (Worth Your Time), Philip Elliott (D.C. Brief), Justin Worland (Future Proof) and Harry Booth (In the Loop). Health Matters is written by TIME's health desk. #### How do I sign up for a TIME newsletter? Go to time.com/newsletters, choose the newsletters you want and enter your email address. There is no cost and no subscription requirement. ### Sources * TIME Newsletters: [time.com/newsletters](/c/time-nl-network-2026q3/newsletters?i=6e60183f-877a-42ac-8006-6fccdd726d61&cr=time-nl-network-2026q3-v1)  by [Philip Elliott](https://time.com/author/philip-elliott/)  ## Philip Elliott Senior Correspondent Feb 18, 2022 7:05 PM UTC  Senator Rand Paul speaks with members of the media following a vote in the Capitol in Washington, on Jan. 11, 2022. Senator Rand Paul speaks with members of the media following a vote in the Capitol in Washington, on Jan. 11, 2022. Al Drago—Bloomberg/Getty Images  by [Philip Elliott](https://time.com/author/philip-elliott/)  ## Philip Elliott Senior Correspondent Feb 18, 2022 7:05 PM UTC _This article is part of the The DC Brief, TIME’s politics newsletter. Sign up_ [_here_](https://cloud.newsletters.time.com/newsletter%5Fopt-in?qs=3a19a0aa35903a2d9f214b74f69a37910b58de73cf3f2b89adc123fac024f0478c72f91010ae9d01f08f46c616068cab3e74726837cd2cce70dac3796e46c2b4) _to get stories like this sent to your inbox._ For months, senior Senators had traded proposals back and forth, mostly in private and with a quiet assumption that they could agree on a unified response should Russia invade Ukraine. After all, American solidarity with the West had pulled the world through the post-World War II era and kept a relative peace in the years since the former Soviet days. The ghosts of [Ike](https://history.state.gov/historicaldocuments/eisenhower), [JFK](https://history.state.gov/historicaldocuments/kennedy) and even [Ronnie](https://history.state.gov/historicaldocuments/reagan) weren’t that far gone. But with war drums echoing in Kyiv, Moscow and Washington alike by mid-February—not to mention in NATO Headquarters in Brussels—the pressure had begun to [seem](https://www.politico.com/news/2022/02/17/senators-unveil-their-attempt-at-a-symbolic-reprimand-for-russia-00009692) insurmountable. With as many as 190,000 Russian forces poised to lay siege to Ukraine, NATO seemingly [incapable](https://www.politico.com/news/2022/02/17/senators-unveil-their-attempt-at-a-symbolic-reprimand-for-russia-00009692) of defending the non-member state against the exact aggression the alliance was built to counter, and senior Ukrainians themselves already [fleeing](https://www.vice.com/en/article/dypwvy/ukraine-oligarchs-flee-invasion-private-jets) the country, the [tendency](https://thehill.com/homenews/senate/594371-gop-senators-unveil-russia-sanctions-bill-as-bipartisan-talks-stall?rl=1) for [inertia](https://www.nytimes.com/2022/02/16/opinion/sanctions-russia-ukraine.html) took over in D.C. The good-faith talks collapsed earlier this week as the [Republicans](https://rollcall.com/2022/02/15/as-bipartisan-talks-stall-gop-goes-it-alone-on-russia-sanctions/) and [Democrats](https://www.nytimes.com/live/2022/02/15/world/russia-ukraine-news#russia-sanctions-congress-republicans) seemed to be sliding apart, especially when it came to the [objective](https://www.politico.com/news/2022/02/17/senators-unveil-their-attempt-at-a-symbolic-reprimand-for-russia-00009692): were lawmakers trying to punish the Russians, or deter them from future actions? Getting to _yes_ is difficult if you don’t see eye to eye on the original question. If comic books teach us anything, it’s that the origin [story matters](https://www.politico.com/news/2022/02/15/senate-poised-to-settle-for-symbolic-rebuke-as-russia-sanctions-talks-fizzle-00009096). In the end? The Senate passed a toothless [rebuke](https://www.politico.com/news/2022/02/17/senators-unveil-their-attempt-at-a-symbolic-reprimand-for-russia-00009692). “We believe that it should say, ‘Nothing in this resolution is to be construed as an authorization for war,’ and ‘Nothing in this resolution is to be construed as authorizing \[the\] introduction of troops into Ukraine,’” Sen. Rand Paul, a Republican from Kentucky, [said](https://www.politico.com/news/2022/02/17/senators-unveil-their-attempt-at-a-symbolic-reprimand-for-russia-00009692). Facing the reality that sanctions require 60 votes to clear the Senate and both sides are divided over whether to impose sanctions now or to hold some back to make an invasion a more painful choice, the leadership in both parties came to agreement: they’d prepare and fast-track a bipartisan—and non-binding—resolution [expressing](http://v) the Senate’s condemnation of a Russian expansion over its borders with Ukraine. It would be symbolic but still better than nothing. Except that their plan required a unified Senate to fast-track the effort; a single objection could trigger hours of debate. And on Thursday, it seemed even that unity was absent. A potential late-night vote proved it. Paul, who is perhaps the most vocal non-interventionist in the Republican Party, threatened to derail the non-binding resolution unless he secured concessions that the document was not going to be used as a declaration of war or a commitment to sending U.S. troops to fight the Russians. The move left lawmakers, who were already grappling with keeping the government open for three more weeks, frustrated. “How would you like to have this headline in Moscow? ‘The U.S. government can’t even stay open. Why are they lecturing us about an invasion of Ukraine?’” said an exasperated Sen. Patrick Leahy, a Democrat from Vermont and the chairman of the Senate Appropriations Committee. Late Thursday, Paul got his way. He won concessions—however immaterial—that allowed him to claim that he averted the current threat of war with Ukraine. And caving to Paul and passing the measure with his tweaks also allowed the entire Senate exit Washington having [funded](https://www.cnn.com/2022/02/17/politics/senate-government-funding-vote/index.html) the government for a few more days and sent an opaque signal to Moscow that the D.C. power structure isn’t happy with the posturing it’s seeing from Russian President Vladimir Putin’s 1950s-era understanding of geopolitics. Senators, already weary from funding the government and gearing up for another fight in two weeks over a massive spending plan to keep the lights on through October, quickly left the Capitol. Once again, colleagues had humored Paul’s eccentricities. But for the slice of the far-right ecosystem he represents, Paul and his stunt proved valuable. For Paul’s fans, it not only was a way to symbolically check any Joe Biden-led military intervention abroad, but also a nod to Donald Trump’s non-interventionist stance. And, given Democrats are on a razor’s edge this fall to hold their majority, even the long-shot Democratic challenger to Paul’s re-election by Charles Booker is worth a beat to consider. Which is to say this: Democrats are on polenta-soft ground as they defend their majority. But Republicans are also foolish in thinking they have an indisputable electoral advantage. A protracted fight over sanctions on Russia wins neither party votes, which is why everyone this week felt burned. _Make sense of what matters in Washington._ [_Sign up for the D.C. Brief newsletter._](https://cloud.newsletters.time.com/politics?source=dc%5Farticle) ```json [{"@context":"https://schema.org","@type":"NewsArticle","@id":"https://time.com/6149542/rand-paul-senate-russia/","mainEntityOfPage":{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https://time.com/6149542/rand-paul-senate-russia/"},"headline":"Rand Paul Almost Killed a Senate Rebuke of Russia. Here’s Why That Matters","datePublished":"2022-02-18T19:05:01.000Z","dateModified":"2026-02-24T13:54:43.670Z","description":"Paul wanted concessions that the document was not going to be used as a declaration of war or a commitment to send U.S. troops to fight Russia.","url":"https://time.com/6149542/rand-paul-senate-russia/","keywords":["The D.C. Brief","feature"],"thumbnailUrl":"https://static.time.com/v3/assets/bltea6093859af6183b/bltcdf2263e11644ab6/698a228fb3fce304b40c8f42/rand-paul-russia.jpg?branch=production&width=1200&quality=75&auto=webp&crop=1200:675&height=675","author":[{"@type":"Person","name":"Philip Elliott","jobTitle":"Senior Correspondent","url":"https://time.com/author/philip-elliott/"}],"articleSection":"Politics","image":[{"@type":"ImageObject","url":"https://static.time.com/v3/assets/bltea6093859af6183b/bltcdf2263e11644ab6/698a228fb3fce304b40c8f42/rand-paul-russia.jpg?branch=production&width=1200&quality=75&auto=webp&crop=1200:675&height=675","width":1200,"height":675,"headline":"Democrats' Voting Rights Push Tilts Toward Filibuster Showdown","caption":"Senator Rand Paul speaks with members of the media following a vote in the Capitol in Washington, on Jan. 11, 2022.","creditText":"Al Drago—Bloomberg/Getty Images","representativeOfPage":true}],"publisher":{"@type":"Organization","name":"Time","url":"https://time.com/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","url":"https://time.com/images/logo.png","width":528,"height":156},"foundingDate":"March 3, 1923","sameAs":["https://www.facebook.com/time","https://www.instagram.com/time/?hl=en","https://twitter.com/time","https://www.pinterest.com/timemagazine"]}},{"@context":"https://schema.org","@type":"BreadcrumbList","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"item":{"@id":"/section/politics/","name":"Politics"}},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"item":{"@id":"/tag/the-dc-brief/","name":"The D.C. Brief"}},{"@type":"ListItem","position":3,"item":{"@id":"https://time.com/6149542/rand-paul-senate-russia/","name":"Rand Paul Almost Killed a Senate Rebuke of Russia. Here’s Why That Matters"}}]}] ```