Catching up on some things I’ve commented on in the past. Remember when Donald Trump said he would end the Ukraine War in 24 hours? I made some suggestions on how he might accomplish this goal. Mainly, it consisted of ways to bring the pain of War to Russia—longer-range weapons to shoot back. As usual, the President ignores my advice. He still tells Ukraine not to hit key cities in Russia. Over half a year into his term, and the War rages on worse than ever.

After several pauses in aid to Ukraine, Trump has concluded that Putin is jerking him around. A former KGB officer can’t be trusted, who knew? Now he’s arranged to ship more arms to the embattled nation that our NATO allies will pay for. To many, this suggests a shift in Trump’s stance on the War.

I’m skeptical. The Washington Post’s David Ignatius, who in the past had good sources, says the new aid includes longer-range weapons and lifts range restrictions on some they already have. Still, unless these weapons hit the political centers of Moscow and St. Petersburg, it won’t matter that much. Till the people of these cities face the same terror that the citizens of Kyiv experience now, Putin has no incentive to change. Yet, Trump says Ukraine shouldn’t hit Moscow.

The President also threatened tough action on the sanctions-tariff front but gave Putin 50 days’ notice before any implementation. After more than six months, why so much time? Is it to head off the Senate from passing the Graham-Blumenthal sanctions bill? The Senate should pass the bill now with its significant bipartisan majority to send a message to both Putin and Trump.

The Administration is touting the amount of money the Treasury is collecting through tariffs. I don’t know why it considers this good news. Tariffs are a tax paid by American importers. Nobody else sends the check to Uncle Sam. Trump is always claiming he’s for lower business taxes, but tell that to our importers.

Inflation hasn’t been significantly affected by the tariffs, according to Trump, so he is correct; the anti-tariff advocates are wrong. He may be taking a bow too soon. Given all the noise, little action has taken place due to the tariffs. We’ve reached only a few tentative trade deals. Consumers don’t see the effect of the tariffs.

Several reasons may explain this delay. First, Importers stocked up ahead of the implementation of the tariffs, so they are not hurting yet. Second, why upset your customers if you think the courts might kill the tariffs? The media has forgotten that the Court of International Trade (CIT)ruled against a wide swath of tariffs. Its ruling is stayed while the appeals court reviews it. We can expect an appeals court decision by the end of summer. Everyone, from nations to importers, has little incentive to rock the boat until we have a final ruling on the extent of the President’s tariff authority.

According to Constitutional lawyers, such as Jonathan Turley, the CIT ruling is well-founded, with more organizations joining the suit. Nations considering retaliatory tariffs are wise to wait and see if they’re even needed. Why get into a trade war if there is no need? A Trump victory lap now seems premature.

Trump’s loud attacks on Federal Reserve Chairman Powell, whom he appointed, for not lowering interest rates are self-serving and possibly self-defeating. With interest on the national debt eclipsing our defense budget, any reduction in this payout makes him look better. The three-point drop demanded by Trump surely would do that.

Even if Powell emulated Arthur Burns in accommodating President Nixon, it could backfire. Keeping rates too low in the early 1970s resulted in double-digit rates by the end of the decade. Nixon got re-elected, but the rest of us lost.

In the current circumstances, it may be challenging for the Federal Reserve (FED) to lower rates by anything like what Trump desires. The Fed controls short rates, but not long-term ones; that’s another story. As I’ve pointed out, the last time the Fed cut rates, the 10 and 30-year Treasuries moved in the opposite direction. If rates have a real negative return (Rate minus Inflation rate), investors have seen that movie before and will price longer bonds to compensate for higher inflation.

The result might be higher mortgage rates and other consumer loans tied to the 10-year treasury bond—the opposite of what Trump demands. Consider that our national debt is still rapidly growing, and Social Security and Medicare will require significant assistance by 2033, if not sooner. Bond buyers have every reason to be nervous. Now isn’t the time to bring the Fed’s independence into serious question.

The question is why the President and his minions, who should be aware of all this, are demanding lower rates rather than tackling our debt problem.

These problems are just some I’ve commented on before that are still moving in the wrong direction.