> ## Content Index
> Fetch the complete content index at: https://www.readtangle.com/llms.txt
> Use this file to discover other available public pages before exploring further.

# CIA Director Ratcliffe’s trip to Russia.
- URL: https://www.readtangle.com/cia-director-ratcliffes-trip-to-russia/
- Published: 2026-08-31T15:58:15.000Z
- Updated: 2026-08-31T15:58:15.000Z
- Description: Plus, does DSA support defunding the police?
- Author: Isaac Saul
- Tags: Russia, Russia Ukraine War, Russia invades Ukraine, Ukraine, Ukraine aid, Ukraine war, War in Ukraine, Vladimir Putin, Volodymyr Zelensky, John Ratcliffe, DSA, Defund the police, William Burns, Baltic states, NATO

Good Monday morning. I’m **Isaac Saul**,and this is Tangle. Thanks to everyone who wrote in with camping tips for toddlers. We had a blast (my brave mother joined), even *after* the sound machine died at 2 AM, a full moon illuminated our entire tent, and my son’s tiny voice pierced the cool forest air: *“Snacky?”* Memories that’ll last a lifetime, for sure. 

![A collage of camping photos](https://storage.ghost.io/c/4a/93/4a939b47-6a19-4b38-a13c-89d5a0f0d6dd/content/images/2026/08/data-src-image-565b63de-c4bd-4742-967b-bea8eb1dc15f.jpeg)

A collage of camping photos

I’m back at my desk this morning to cover a different kind of trip — **CIA Director John Ratcliffe’s mysterious visit to Russia**.Plus, a reader question about **“defund the police”** and an under-the-radar story about **Trump’s deportation efforts**. 

It’s a **14-minute read**. 

### Bring back shame?

On Friday, Associate Editor Carina Pacheco explored the cultural shift toward “normalizing” behaviors once seen as weird or unacceptable. She wrote:

> I shudder to think of the mud that so many good, necessary emotions have been dragged through to get to the altar of normalization, chief among them shame and embarrassment... They form the bedrock of the shared norms and values that keep society functional. Varying degrees of risk-taking and independent decision-making — and failure — are essential to establishing character and creating the foundation of self-trust and resilience that *everyone* needs to truly grow.

Check out Carina’s full essay [here](https://www.readtangle.com/bring-back-shame/).

### Quick hits.

1. President Donald Trump announced Venezuela had agreed to allow the United States to take control of approximately 65 billion barrels of its oil reserves. Venezuelan interim President Delcy Rodríguez said the deal will generate an estimated $209 billion for Venezuela. ([The agreement](https://www.reuters.com/business/energy/venezuelas-interim-president-says-us-energy-deal-will-last-25-years-2026-08-30/?ref=readtangle.com))
2. The U.S. and Iran exchanged strikes for the first time in one month, with the U.S. attacking Iranian rocket launchers in the Strait of Hormuz and Iran launching missiles at a Jordanian air base housing U.S. troops. ([The strikes](https://www.washingtonpost.com/national-security/2026/08/30/us-strikes-iran-missile-sites-larak-island/?ref=readtangle.com))
3. The death toll from flash floods in Nepal and China last week surpassed 950, with over 4,400 people still missing. ([The latest](https://apnews.com/article/nepal-tibet-china-flash-floods-744fe6e15ae7751e15efcd6dff70170c?ref=readtangle.com)) Separately, flash flooding in the Grand Canyon caused significant infrastructure damage and killed at least one person, with an estimated 15 people still missing. ([The floods](https://www.foxnews.com/us/deadly-grand-canyon-flooding-knocks-critical-water-line-race-find-missing-hikers?ref=readtangle.com))
4. Federal Reserve Chairman Kevin Warsh suggested that the central bank could raise interest rates if inflation does not move toward the bank’s 2% target, though he expressed optimism about the health of the broader economy. ([The comments](https://www.cnbc.com/2026/08/28/kevin-warsh-jackson-hole-federal-reserve-inflation.html?ref=readtangle.com))
5. Icelanders voted 52.8%–47.2% against a proposal to restart negotiations over the country joining the European Union. ([The vote](https://abcnews.com/International/wireStory/icelandic-voters-reject-proposal-restart-negotiations-join-european-136067682?ref=readtangle.com))

Today's Partner 

****There’s Someone Watching Your Internet Activity**

Every website you visit and every network you join leaves a trace. ISPs log browsing activity by default in most countries, and public WiFi makes it even easier for someone nearby to intercept your connection.

[****Proton VPN**](https://go.getproton.me/aff%5Fc?offer%5Fid=25&aff%5Fid=19661&ref=readtangle.com) encrypts that connection and hides your IP address, so [your browsing activity stays private](https://go.getproton.me/aff%5Fc?offer%5Fid=25&aff%5Fid=19661&ref=readtangle.com) from your ISP, your network, and anyone else watching. The no-logs policy is independently audited, and the apps are fully open source — privacy that can be verified, not just claimed.

It also lets you keep watching what you want, even while traveling, [connects up to 10 devices at once](https://go.getproton.me/aff%5Fc?offer%5Fid=25&aff%5Fid=19661&ref=readtangle.com), and runs at speeds fast enough that you won’t notice it’s on.  
  
[****Get 70% off Proton VPN**](https://go.getproton.me/aff%5Fc?offer%5Fid=25&aff%5Fid=19661&ref=readtangle.com) — for a limited time, backed by a 30-day money-back guarantee.

[Get 70% off ](https://go.getproton.me/aff%5Fc?offer%5Fid=25&aff%5Fid=19661&ref=readtangle.com) 

### Today’s topic. 

Ratcliffe’s Russia visit. On Tuesday, August 25, Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) Director John Ratcliffe traveled to Moscow, Russia, for the first publicly disclosed time to meet with Russian intelligence officials. While the CIA has not shared the official purpose of the trip, Ratcliffe [reportedly](https://www.wsj.com/politics/policy/cia-chiefs-surprise-moscow-trip-was-to-warn-russia-not-to-attack-nato-c2d997f3?ref=readtangle.com) cautioned Russia against attacking North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) member states. The visit also comes after four and a half years of war between Russia and Ukraine with little progress in peace discussions. 

**Back up:** In November 2021, then-CIA Director William Burns visited Moscow to [warn](https://www.cnn.com/2021/11/05/politics/bill-burns-moscow-ukraine?ref=readtangle.com) Russia not to attack Ukraine, the last known visit to the capital by a CIA director until last week. Russia launched its full-scale invasion of Ukraine three months later, in February 2022, and efforts by the Biden and Trump administrations (as well as other nations) to facilitate an end to the conflict have failed to produce a breakthrough. 

As peace talks have stalled, Putin has [issued new threats](https://www.nytimes.com/2026/08/24/world/europe/uk-andy-burnham-ukraine-russia.html?ref=readtangle.com) against NATO countries supporting Ukraine, and some U.S. officials have raised concerns that he would consider a limited attack on a member state to test the alliance’s unity. Politico [reported](https://www.politico.com/news/2026/08/26/cia-russia-nato-moscow-ratcliffe-01051848?ref=readtangle.com) that Ratcliffe specifically highlighted the Baltic states — Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania — as countries the United States sees as potential targets. Russia and Ukraine have also ramped up drone attacks in recent weeks, and Ukrainian officials have suggested that new Russian ground offensives are being planned. 

In addition to his warnings against a wider European conflict, Ratcliffe [reportedly](https://www.axios.com/2026/08/29/cia-director-ratcliffe-putin-zelensky-summit-war?ref=readtangle.com) proposed a meeting between President Donald Trump, Russian President Putin, and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky to revamp negotiations. Separately, a top Ukrainian official [told](https://www.kyivpost.com/post/83218?ref=readtangle.com) local reporters that new talks between Ukraine and Russia could begin in September. 

President Trump called Ratcliffe’s Moscow visit “semi-routine” and part of his administration’s efforts to facilitate a peace deal. The president also [said](https://www.axios.com/2026/08/27/trump-nato-russia-ukraine-war?ref=readtangle.com) he was “not concerned… at all” about Russia attacking a NATO country.

Today, we’ll share views from the right, left, and writers abroad about Ratcliffe’s visit and the broader state of the Ukraine–Russia war. Then, Executive Editor Isaac Saul gives his take.

| What the right is saying. Some on the right say Ratcliffe’s visit should be the start of more demonstrations of NATO’s resolve. Others suggest the true purpose of the meeting is still ambiguous. |
| -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- |

**In the Washington Examiner, Ivana Stradner and Mark Montgomery argued** [**“Putin is testing NATO because he thinks the West will flinch.”**](https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/restoring-america/courage-strength-optimism/4704475/putin-testing-nato-thinks-west-will-flinch/?ref=readtangle.com)

“CIA Director John Ratcliffe’s visit to Moscow this week comes as U.S. intelligence warned that Russian President Vladimir Putin may be prepared to escalate against NATO. Washington must use this moment to send a simple message to Moscow: Russia cannot attack the West from the shadows and expect the West to stay silent,” Stradner and Montgomery wrote. “Russia’s campaign against Western Europe is already visible. In Germany, multiple explosive-filled drones, resembling drones used by Russia in Ukraine, have been found around the Leipzig airport. In Britain, the U.K.’s National Cyber Security Centre has warned that Russian groups continue to target British organizations.”

“Russia is testing NATO, and it is time to stop absorbing the blows and start imposing costs. The West needs to close the gaps Moscow is exploiting and make clear that every provocation carries a price,” Stradner and Montgomery said. “Washington is sending mixed signals. On one hand, the CIA director is warning Moscow not to test NATO. On the other hand, Elbridge Colby, undersecretary of war for policy, is pressing the alliance to take more responsibility as Washington considers reducing its military troops in Europe further. If we believe Putin may test NATO, this is no time for ambiguity.”

**In The Telegraph, John Bolton called Ratcliffe’s visit** [**“classic Trumpian political theatre.”**](https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2026/08/30/the-cia-trip-moscow-classic-trumpian-political-theatre/?ref=readtangle.com)

“No one buys Donald Trump’s initial ploy that the trip was ‘semi-routine’, a palpably duplicitous effort to conceal something more substantive,” Bolton wrote. “Leaks then emerged that Ratcliffe sought to warn Russia against attacking NATO members. Increasingly hostile Kremlin behaviour has worried alliance leaders. What had seemed to be a Kremlin ‘hybrid war’ against NATO was looking decidedly less hybrid.”

“Perhaps \[Ratcliffe\] wanted to urge the Kremlin not to continue sharing intelligence with Iran or military assistance that endangered U.S. and Israeli forces. Or perhaps Ratcliffe wanted to talk about Trump’s announcement of an ‘economic D-Day’ against Iranian trade and finance, and urge Russian cooperation with U.S. efforts,” Bolton said. “None of these publicly mooted rationales are satisfactory… Intelligence chiefs do talk to foreign counterparts, but almost always to allies or close partners, rarely hostile states. If sensitive matters of state are involved, countries have foreign ministers so they can talk to one another.”

| What the left is saying. Many on the left say the U.S. must remain a staunch defender of NATO amid Putin’s latest threats.Others say the U.S. and Europe must make Russia’s escalatory tactics costlier. |
| -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- |

**In The Atlantic, Thomas Wright asked** [**“why did John Ratcliffe go to Moscow?”**](https://www.theatlantic.com/international/2026/08/cia-director-ratcliffe-moscow/688424/?ref=readtangle.com)

“Ratcliffe’s visit comes at one of the most difficult periods in the war for the Kremlin. Thanks to its drone systems, Ukraine has been able to strike military targets and oil infrastructure deep inside Russia while also hindering Moscow’s advance on the battlefield, turning the front into a kill box in which anything that moves is struck within minutes. Despite making little progress, Russia has continued to take heavy losses,” Wright wrote. “Russia’s weakness could be making Putin more reckless… But Putin may see attacking a NATO country as an unprecedented opportunity to break the alliance, by manufacturing a crisis in which the United States fails to act.”

“On his way to Moscow, Ratcliffe stopped in Latvia. Today, the Latvian prime minister called the trip a ‘very good signal,’ which seemed to imply that Ratcliffe had been there seeking to bolster European security,” Wright said. “If the CIA director carried a warning with him, it should have been an unambiguous one: Any attack on NATO territory would bring in the United States. Trump might not want to make that type of commitment, but it may be necessary to ensure that Putin never concludes that he has an opportunity to start a war that breaks NATO.”

**The Bloomberg editorial board said** [**“NATO and the EU must make Russia’s hybrid war costlier.”**](https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2026-08-28/nato-can-do-more-to-counter-russia-s-hybrid-attacks-in-europe?srnd=phx-opinion&ref=readtangle.com)

“Government and intelligence officials in Germany and the UK, among others, say attacks from Russia now occur daily. Because they are small-scale, deniable and rarely lethal, they get filed under the anodyne label ‘hybrid warfare,’ which sounds like a problem to be managed. They’re far more serious than that — and they require a more concerted response,” the board wrote. “While panic would just serve the Kremlin’s goals, passivity isn’t the answer either. As with conventional deterrence, allies must demonstrate that attacks come with costs.

“Europe needs faster, more layered counter-drone defenses — at airports, ports and logistics hubs — that combine detection, electronic warfare, network disruption and physical interception. Countering hybrid action also requires more seamless intelligence sharing. NATO and the European Union have moved too slowly, with too little coordination, for a threat that changes by the month,” the board said. “For its part, the US shouldn’t dismiss Russia's hybrid campaign as a mere European nuisance. Russian drones have probed bases housing US forces and sites associated with US nuclear weapons; the larger target is American credibility.”

| What writers abroad are saying. Some writers abroad question whether Ratcliffe’s visit will have the desired effect.Others suggest the Trump administration is offering Putin an off-ramp. |
| ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ |

**In the Kyiv Post, Timothy Ash wrote** [**“Putin tests NATO’s Article 5 defense.”**](https://www.kyivpost.com/opinion/83269?ref=readtangle.com)

“Putin’s war in Ukraine is not going well, as Ukraine has stabilized the front lines and is now increasingly successful in taking the war to Russia via deep strike drone attacks on refineries and on line retailer warehouses in Russia. Putin is worried and is escalating to try and force NATO to pull support for Ukraine and force Ukraine into a peace on his terms,” Ash said. “What was the specific intel that the US received on Russia’s plans to attack NATO, or escalate in Ukraine, that prompted the Trump administration — that has typically given the Putin regime a pass/benefit of the doubt on all things Ukraine-related — to dispatch Ratcliffe to Moscow?”

“Presumably Ratcliffe was sent to Moscow to read the riot act to the Kremlin and reassure that the U.S/ would still stand by its allies under NATO’s Article 5 defense. That message surely will have been dulled by the fact that President Trump seems to have gone overboard in recent years in questioning, challenging and undermining that very defense,” Ash wrote. “I think Ratcliffe flying into Russia via Latvia was meant to send a strong message and perhaps indicates that the specific threat was to the Baltic states. But the real question here is if Bill Burns’s trip to Moscow as CIA director in 2021 to deliver a similar warning to the Kremlin (not to invade Ukraine) was ignored — what’s to think that Putin will not just ignore Ratcliffe this time?”

**In The Independent, Peter Frankopan explored** [**“the real reason the CIA boss John Ratcliffe made a secret trip to Moscow.”**](https://www.the-independent.com/voices/cia-john-ratcliffe-secret-visit-russia-moscow-putin-b3041478.html?ref=readtangle.com)

“For some time, the US has been concerned that the circle around Vladimir Putin does what most tight-knit circles do around powerful autocrats: deliver news that the ruler wants to hear. Ratcliffe urged \[the head of Russia’s intelligence agency Aleksander\] Bortnikov to tell the Russian president what was really happening — not only on the front lines, nor even behind them where long-range strikes by Ukrainian missiles and drones have devastated Russia’s economy by targeting refineries, warehouses and more,” Frankopan said. “These are no paper cuts; they have done — and will do more — serious damage.”

“If the US assessment is that the storm clouds that are forming are so bleak that nothing is off the table, then Ratcliffe’s shadowy visit makes more sense: by going to Moscow in person, Ratcliffe was able to make sure his message would be heard properly in a way that would have been harder to achieve otherwise,” Frankopan wrote. “By sitting Bortnikov down and explaining how the US sees things, offering to help, and warning that if Russia does not do a deal soon with Ukraine, the ramifications will be both unpredictable and seismic, Ratcliffe was offering an off-ramp.”

| My take. Isaac Saul Executive Editor ![Isaac Saul](https://storage.ghost.io/c/4a/93/4a939b47-6a19-4b38-a13c-89d5a0f0d6dd/content/images/2025/05/Isaac.jpg)                                                                                                                                                                                             |
| ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ |
| We don’t know why Ratcliffe visited Moscow, but we should know by now that the Western consensus on Putin is often accurate.Also, we should remember that Trump’s unpredictability in foreign affairs isn’t always an advantage.It’s easy to look back and see that the U.S. should have backed Ukraine earlier; it’s harder to see what happens next. |
| **Reminder:** This is where we share a personal opinion. If you have feedback, criticism or compliments, leave a comment or reply to this email.                                                                                                                                                                                                       |

News of Ratcliffe’s visit has me reflecting on three lessons we should all collectively have learned about the Ukraine–Russia war by now.

Remember, just months after the last time a CIA director made a trip like this to Moscow, with a similar goal of deterring Russian military action, Putin launched his full-scale invasion of Ukraine.

At the time, members of the military establishment and legacy media [warned up and down](https://www.cnbc.com/2021/11/17/the-world-is-worried-putin-is-about-to-invade-ukraine-heres-why.html?ref=readtangle.com) that Putin would invade Ukraine. Yet [heterodox](https://www.mediaite.com/media/news/im-sorry-journalist-matt-taibbi-apologizes-for-repeatedly-telling-readers-russia-would-not-invade-ukraine/?ref=readtangle.com), independent [analysts](https://x.com/ggreenwald/status/1496568414269288459?s=20&t=fE0BwkAC12pg1BOlEWuuRA&ref=readtangle.com) and journalists [weren’t buying it](https://x.com/realcandaceo/status/1485687865765945344?ref=readtangle.com): They accused establishment writers of fear-mongering and insisted Putin wasn’t stupid enough to try something so self-destructive. The invasion provided a [good reminder](https://www.readtangle.com/russia-invades-ukraine-war/#:~:text=Sometimes%2C%20in%20fact%20more%20often%20than%20not%2C%20the%20mainstream%20narrative%20is%20the%20one%20most%20rooted%20in%20truth.%20That%27s%20why%20it%20is%20mainstream.) that the mainstream, consensus opinion is often the mainstream, consensus opinion because it reflects a shared reality that mature, sober people are living in. 

After this visit, there’s a lot more uncertainty about what the Russian autocrat is capable of. You’ll notice that, now, very few people are climbing out on the limb to say he’d “never attack NATO.” It seems like a genuine possibility, and it should. Perhaps everyone has come to terms with the man we are dealing with. 

That’s Lesson #1: The Western consensus about Putin is often accurate. 

On the other side of the coin, that consensus isn’t very confident that an attack on a NATO ally would guarantee a response from the United States. This uncertainty, too, is new and uncharted territory. 

Across both his terms, President Trump has distanced the United States from its commitment to defending NATO. He has successfully pushed European nations to contribute more resources to the alliance under threat of a U.S. withdrawal. In so doing, he’s been explicit that he wouldn’t automatically defend our NATO allies, even in the case of a Russian attack. You might remember February 2024, when then-candidate Trump recalled telling NATO allies that he “would encourage” Russia to “do whatever the hell they want” to NATO allies who haven’t spent enough on alliance defense. “No, I would not protect you,” he [told](https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/trump-says-he-told-nato-ally-to-spend-more-on-defense-or-he-would-encourage-russia-to-do-whatever-the-hell-they-want?ref=readtangle.com#:~:text=%22%27You%20didn%27t%20pay%3F%20You%27re%20delinquent%3F%27%22%20Trump%20recounted%20saying.%20%22%27No%20I%20would%20not%20protect%20you.%20In%20fact%2C%20I%20would%20encourage%20them%20to%20do%20whatever%20the%20hell%20they%20want.%20You%20gotta%20pay.%20You%20gotta%20pay%20your%20bills.%27%22) them. 

That posture [was effective](https://www.nytimes.com/2026/07/07/world/europe/nato-defense-spending-trump-rutte.html?ref=readtangle.com) at pushing NATO allies to contribute more to the alliance, which is good. It reduces our burden and increases the overall security of NATO. Generally speaking, unpredictability — that black hole of “what will he do?” — has always been a weapon in Trump’s foreign policy arsenal. 

The downside, though, is this tactic tempts Russia to test whether an attack on a NATO nation would provoke a full force response from the alliance. As NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg [said](https://www.pbs.org/newshour/world/nato-secretary-general-says-trump-puts-allies-at-risk-by-encouraging-russian-aggression?ref=readtangle.com) back in 2024, “Any suggestion that allies will not defend each other undermines all of our security, including that of the U.S., and puts American and European soldiers at increased risk.”

Trump was insisting last week that Russia won’t attack, and maybe he’s right. But Ratcliffe’s visit, and reporting from across the globe, suggests a much different behind-the-scenes understanding of what Putin may actually try. And if Putin were sure about how we’d respond, he’d never consider it in the first place. 

And that’s Lesson #2: Being unpredictable isn’t always an advantage. 

All of this comes at a critical moment in the war. Roughly a year ago, Ukraine’s position on the battlefield [appeared to be slipping](https://x.com/TheStudyofWar/status/1965563704881078451?s=20&ref=readtangle.com). Now, Russia is facing heavy losses and constant incursions of Ukrainian drones in its airspace. Last month, Ratcliffe shared the [astounding statistic](https://www.nytimes.com/2026/06/30/us/politics/cia-reorganization-cyber-ai.html?ref=readtangle.com#:~:text=Mr.%20Ratcliffe%20noted%20that%20the%20life%20expectancy%20of%20a%20Russian%20soldier%20on%20the%20frontline%20in%20Ukraine%20was%20less%20than%2035%20minutes.%20%E2%80%9CMuch%20of%20the%20reason%20is%20technology%20and%20how%20drones%20have%20become%20super%2Defficient%2C%20low%2Dcost%20killing%20machines%2C%E2%80%9D%20Mr.%20Ratcliffe%20said.) that the average life expectancy of a Russian soldier once deployed to the Ukrainian front was less than 35 minutes. Surely, part of the message Ratcliffe was sent to deliver in private is that the war has turned against Putin — and now would be a wise time to come to the table and make a deal. 

These developments have me feeling a bit torn. Hindsight is 20/20, but it’s easy to envision a very different war if we had vigorously supported Ukraine from day 1\. What if the Biden administration had gone all-in on giving Ukraine everything they asked for right away, rather than [delaying and sputtering](https://www.readtangle.com/biden-approves-ukraine-to-use-long-distance-weapons/#:~:text=Ukraine%E2%80%99s%20military%20leaders,offensive%20in%20August.) at every turn? Would the war be over now? What if — 20 months ago — Trump had not entered office with animosity toward Zelensky and had ramped up U.S. support rather than cut it back? Would we have a peace deal by now? 

On the other hand, Ukraine’s gains have mostly come in the last few months — *after* the Trump administration began scaling down its support and Ukraine’s European allies began [scaling theirs up](https://www.pbs.org/newshour/world/why-the-eus-106-billion-wartime-loan-is-a-vital-lifeline-for-cash-strapped-ukraine?ref=readtangle.com). A reasonable lesson to learn from that *might be* that Ukraine didn’t need all the U.S. support they were asking for after all; they just needed Europe to do more. Maybe that’s just correlation, and all Ukraine needed was to develop its [slaughterbots](https://www.readtangle.com/ukraine-war-update-may-2026/#:~:text=Ukraine%20uses%20artificial%20intelligence%20systems%20to%20help%20pilot%20small%20quadcopter%20drones%2C%20turning%20cheap%20and%20easy%2Dto%2Dmake%20machines%20into%20tools%20sometimes%20referred%20to%20as%20%E2%80%9Cslaughterbots.%E2%80%9D), but it’s equally easy to envision (again) how much better off Ukraine would have been had *both* the United States and Europe thrown their full weight behind it from the jump.

Of course, the hesitancy here and abroad in backing Ukraine was never about money or weapons. It was about the risk of *wasting* money and weapons, or escalating a war with a nuclear power that we couldn’t finish. That is, backing a country that everyone expected to fold in a matter of weeks. And then, when that country survived those weeks, backing a country that would fold at the first winter. And then, when they survived the first winter, backing a country that — at best — could only manage a stalemate. 

Rather than do the right thing and fund or fight a just war defending 40 million free people from an invading nation, the U.S. and Europe fretted over whether they were backing the winning horse. 

Which brings us to Lesson #3: Betting on the *winning* horse isn’t nearly as important as betting on the *right* horse.

Obviously, I don’t know what will happen next. But I’m left wondering the same thing Timothy Ash wrote (under “What writers abroad are saying”): “What was the specific intel that the U.S. received on Russia’s plans to attack NATO, or escalate in Ukraine, that prompted the Trump administration — that has typically given the Putin regime a pass/benefit of the doubt on all things Ukraine-related — to dispatch Ratcliffe to Moscow?”

I can’t imagine it’s good. With so much of our military capacity currently tied up or being expended in Iran, even a small tussle with Russia in Europe could be devastating — for our munitions and military, but also for global security and the global economy. Whatever the Trump administration’s message to Putin was, it was clearly intended to keep him from testing the United States. 

Let’s just hope it worked. 

| Staff dissent. Ari Weitzman Managing Editor ![](https://storage.ghost.io/c/4a/93/4a939b47-6a19-4b38-a13c-89d5a0f0d6dd/content/images/2025/05/Ari.jpg)                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                 |
| ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- |
| I have a narrow disagreement with Isaac today: I don’t think Putin is going to attack a NATO country. And if you don’t want to take it from me, take it from Finnish President Alexander Stubb, who [said](https://www.bild.de/politik/ausland-und-internationales/finnen-praesident-stubb-widerspricht-deutschland-putin-wird-nato-nicht-angreifen-6a92ee10518a586e1855c84e?ref=readtangle.com) just last week (translated to English), “I don’t believe that Russia would ever want to attack the world’s most powerful military alliance, NATO.” Stubb is as close to this issue as it gets, and not just geographically. Finland, very notably, successfully lobbied to join the alliance after Putin’s invasion of Ukraine in 2022, specifically because he believed Finland would be better protected from Russian attacks if it joined. [So did Sweden.](https://www.npr.org/2024/03/07/1236618583/sweden-officially-joins-nato-as-worries-grow-over-russian-aggression-in-europe?ref=readtangle.com)  Furthermore, Trump isn’t the only leader in this saga who likes muddying the waters as a foreign policy tool. In just this current war, Putin has deliberately signalled uncertainty about whether he’d [use nuclear weapons](https://icds.ee/en/russias-nuclear-signalling-problem-too-much-left-to-chance/?ref=readtangle.com). Yes, I know that he actually could be willing to use nuclear weapons in Ukraine. And yes, Putin’s administration [has referred](https://www.stripes.com/theaters/europe/2023-05-18/medvedev-poland-baltics-nato-10155836.html?ref=readtangle.com) to the Baltic states as “provinces.” And, yes, I’m aware that the argument “Putin’s not that reckless or stupid” failed when it came to the Kyiv offensive. But truly — I don’t think he’s this reckless or stupid. Provoking the entire NATO alliance is a Hitler-invading-Russia kind of blunder that a student of Russian military history like Putin is not likely to make.  Everyone has a line, and if “invading Latvia” isn’t Putin’s, then people like President Stubb — whose national security depends on reading the Russian leader — have grossly, grossly misread him. |

**Take the survey:** Will Putin attack a NATO country in the next two years? [Let us know](https://interrobang.vercel.app/survey/66661eca-9032-408a-b405-03cea012ea3b?ref=readtangle.com). 

*Disagree? That*’*s okay. Our opinion is just one of many. Write in and let us know why, and we*’*ll consider publishing your feedback.*

### Your questions, answered.

**Q: There have been more discussions recently about democratic socialism. I resonate with many of their principles (such as expanding access to child care and other benefits), but the “defund the police” one seems very far off to the left, and I don’t think many people are actually in line with that thinking. After doing some research, I saw that people actually think of it more as reforming the police system rather than abolishing it.**

**Which is it actually?**

**— Manny from Washington, D.C.**

**Tangle:** “Defunding” and “reforming” the police are two distinct camps, but the waters can be muddied. Reform is focused on changing how police are trained and holding them accountable when they make mistakes. Some who want to defund the police say their position is different than *abolishing* the institution, instead seeking to redirect funds from police to different public services. Conversely, other defund-the-police advocates take fault with the concept of law enforcement as a whole and want to eliminate and replace it with community-oriented public safety services — aligning them with police abolitionists. They see policing as a fundamentally unreformable and violent institution. 

“Defund the police” was a rallying cry for activists in the summer of 2020, but it’s since become [politically unpopular](https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2021/10/26/growing-share-of-americans-say-they-want-more-spending-on-police-in-their-area/?ref=readtangle.com), and many politicians who adopted the slogan have recently tried to distance themselves from it. 

As the Democratic Socialists of America (DSA) gains prominence, its stance on policing is gaining attention. The DSA *does* advocate for abolishing the police in the long run. Its Abolition Working Group platform [reads](https://web.archive.org/web/20260731234232/https://www.dsausa.org/working-groups/abolition-working-group/), “For all of the working class to achieve collective liberation we must constrain, diminish, and abolish the carceral forces of the state — from prisons and police themselves, to their manifestations in all forms throughout society.” 

As for individual DSA or democratic socialist-aligned candidates, it’s a mixed bag. Politicians like Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY), Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-MN), and Rep. Rashida Tlaib (D-MI) were [vocal supporters](https://www.newsweek.com/which-lawmakers-support-defunding-police-1510556?ref=readtangle.com) of defunding the police in 2020 but have stopped centering the issue in their platforms (though they haven’t explicitly renounced the slogan, either). Some, like [New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani (D)](https://www.cnn.com/2025/07/31/politics/mamdani-defund-police-shooting?ref=readtangle.com) and [Michigan Senate candidate Abdul El-Sayed (D)](https://www.cnn.com/2026/07/07/politics/kfile-abdul-el-sayed-michigan-senate-defund-police-fact-check?ref=readtangle.com), have sought to distance themselves from past support. And others, like [Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT)](https://www.axios.com/2020/06/09/bernie-sanders-defund-police?ref=readtangle.com), have opposed the idea from the beginning. 

So we can’t cleanly describe the positions of democratic socialists as if they were a monolith — it’s better to evaluate each politician individually — but it’s true that DSA’s national platform advocates for fully defunding the police.

**Want to have a question answered in the newsletter? You can reply to this email (it goes straight to our inbox) or** [**fill out this form**](https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLScQhqBSG%5F6%5FoBhwcTQMeS570n29XYbeQ9C9Bis7rjqI31g1tA/viewform?usp=header&ref=readtangle.com)**.** 

### Under the radar.

On Friday, a federal judge ruled that Secretary of State Marco Rubio’s attempts to deport noncitizens for political speech violated the First and Fifth Amendments. The Stanford Daily, the student-run newspaper of Stanford University, and a second, unnamed plaintiff brought the suit, alleging that the State Department’s policy caused noncitizens to refrain from writing opinion articles out of fear of deportation. In 2025, the Trump administration sought to revoke the immigration statuses of noncitizens involved in protests against the war in Gaza, including Columbia University activist Mahmoud Khalil and Tufts University graduate student Rümeysa Öztürk. Judge Noël Wise found that this effort violated constitutional free speech protections, but a State Department spokesperson said the U.S. is “under no obligation to admit or suffer the presence of individuals who subvert our laws and deny our citizens their Constitutional rights.” [Politico has the story](https://www.politico.com/news/2026/08/29/rubio-immigration-first-fifth-amendments-01056086?ref=readtangle.com).

From Proton VPN 

****Stop Letting the Internet Watch You**

Your internet provider can see a lot of what you do online. Frankly, they [don’t need to know you Googled that](https://go.getproton.me/aff%5Fc?offer%5Fid=25&aff%5Fid=19661&ref=readtangle.com).

Proton VPN encrypts your connection, [hides your IP](https://go.getproton.me/aff%5Fc?offer%5Fid=25&aff%5Fid=19661&ref=readtangle.com), and has an independently audited no-logs policy. Plus, it works on 10 devices.

[****Tangle readers get 70% off Proton VPN today.** ](https://go.getproton.me/aff%5Fc?offer%5Fid=25&aff%5Fid=19661&ref=readtangle.com)[****Only $2.99/month**](https://go.getproton.me/aff%5Fc?offer%5Fid=25&aff%5Fid=19661&ref=readtangle.com)****.**

### The extras.

- **One year ago today** we had just republished [Isaac’s essay on the Uvalde, Texas, school shooting](https://www.readtangle.com/we-are-still-broken-2025-minnesota-shooting/).
- **The most clicked link in our last regular newsletter** was [our most recent episode of *Suspension of the Rules*](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=25U8Vsnfmbw&ref=readtangle.com)*.*
- **Nothing to do with politics:** [Portland, Oregon, hosts a parallel parking competition](https://www.instagram.com/reels/Dcr8kiFB1bW/?ref=readtangle.com).
- **Our last survey:** 1,613 readers responded to our survey on Meta’s planned social-media platform changes, with implementing daily usage time limits ranked as the most effective change. “These changes should be implemented across the board for all social media platforms,” one respondent said. “I believe it’s the parents’ responsibility to monitor their children’s time not only on the apps, but the internet as a whole,” said another.

![](https://storage.ghost.io/c/4a/93/4a939b47-6a19-4b38-a13c-89d5a0f0d6dd/content/images/2026/08/data-src-image-0518a713-38df-4419-860d-c3115a401710.png)

### Have a nice day.

In 1998, Michael J. Fox revealed he had been diagnosed with Parkinson’s disease. 28 years later, he became the recipient of the Bob Hope Humanitarian Award at the Emmys. Fox founded The Michael J. Fox Foundation two years after he announced his diagnosis, and it’s since become the world’s largest nonprofit funder of Parkinson’s research, backing over $3 billion in studies toward better treatments and a cure. Best known for his roles in *Family Ties* and *Back to the Future*, Fox has become as renowned for his work with the disease as for his acting. “His dedication to helping others navigate the challenges of this disease serves as an inspiration to us all,” said Joseph Litzinger, co-chair of the Television Academy’s awards committee. [Television Academy has the story](https://www.televisionacademy.com/features/news/awards-news/270729-bob-hope-humanitarian-award?ref=readtangle.com).