Nagging questions about Joe Biden’s reelection seem poised to continue on Capitol Hill on Wednesday, as former Speaker Nancy Pelosi was decidedly lukewarm in her assessment of the situation to MSNBC’s “Morning Joe.”

“It’s up to the president to decide if he is going to run,” she said. “We’re all encouraging him to make that decision. Because time is running short.” Asked if she’d like him to continue his reelection bid, the former speaker said merely: “I want him to do whatever he decides to do.”

Pelosi previously expressed “full confidence” in Biden, and she spoke glowingly of his record in office on Wednesday morning.

It briefly seemed like Biden’s team had weathered much of the political storm on Tuesday — Senate Democrats were mum after a ‘family discussion’ on the president’s viability, and no flood of new calls for the incumbent to step aside materialized from the House side.

But Pelosi’s comments come after Sen. Michael Bennet (D-Colo.) went public with his private concerns late Tuesday, telling CNN former President Donald Trump could win this fall in a “landslide” and that the Biden White House has done “nothing to really demonstrate that they have a plan to win this election.”

The blunt talk from the usually soft-spoken senator followed notable developments from two New Jersey Democrats: Rep. Mikie Sherrill called for Biden to stand down (the 7th member to publicly do so). And Rep. Andy Kim, the likely next senator from the Garden State, acknowledged lingering “concerns” with Biden as the party’s standard bearer.

What does it all amount to? The questions on Biden’s fitness won’t be going away anytime soon, especially leading up to a Thursday press conference from the president surrounding the NATO summit in Washington.

Senate Democrats, like their House counterparts before them, left a caucus meeting Tuesday trapped in Joe Biden-electability limbo.

Senators went into the meeting, their first since the president’s shaky debate, saying they needed to have a broader conversation before offering their assessment of Biden’s standing atop the ticket. By the end, it seemed all Democrats agreed on is that they need to beat former President Donald Trump in November.

Majority Whip Dick Durbin said “it remains to be seen” if Biden should still be the party’s presidential nominee. Sen. Maria Cantwell (D-Wash.), following the lunch on Tuesday, stood behind Biden and said it’s up to voters on how to proceed.

“I think we have some ideas about how to proceed next,” Cantwell said. “Me personally, I want a standard bearer that’s going to keep it on an economic message. I don’t think we’ve done enough of that, I think we have to do more of that. Whoever’s leading has to do more of that.”

Many typically chatty senators almost entirely refused to talk with press about their caucus’ conversation — aside from a few members saying the group had a “good” or “constructive” discussion. Many also refused to answer questions on whether there were calls for Biden to step down within the lunch. Sen. John Fetterman (D-Pa.) insisted no one was negative.

A number of senators spoke at the meeting, according to attendees, and the conversation appears to have remained civil.

The House Democratic meeting Tuesday morning was a similar story — they emerged from the family discussion with no clear path forward on how to handle Biden’s future on the ticket. While seven House Democrats have called on Biden to step aside as the party nominee, no Senate Democrats have done so. Many have offered critical remarks or insisted the president needs to prove himself as capable of staying in the race.

Majority Leader Chuck Schumer, at the weekly Democratic leadership press conference following the lunch, only echoed his oft-repeated “I’m with Joe” line when asked repeated questions about Biden’s prospects.

Sen. Patty Murray (D-Wash.), a senior Senate Democrat who voiced serious concerns about Biden’s viability, didn’t speak about the president during that press conference Tuesday. She said in a statement Monday that Democrats need to see “a much more forceful and energetic candidate on the campaign trail in the very near future.”

Another member of Senate Democratic leadership, Debbie Stabenow (D-Mich.), expressed confidence in Biden’s viability in her swing state even as “I appreciate and understand” concerns with the incumbent following his debate performance. The meeting, the Michigan Democrat said, had a large focus on Trump.

“The meeting was very thoughtful and very good and we spent most of our time talking about Donald Trump and why a convicted felon has not been called upon to step down by the press,” Stabenow said.

Other lawmakers, including several in competitive reelection bids of their own, played coy on whether it would be valuable for Biden to come to Capitol Hill to address his party.

“I’m not going to give advice,” said Sen. Bob Casey (D-Pa.), who’s up for reelection in his swing state this fall.

David Lim and Eleanor Mueller contributed to this report.

New Jersey Rep. Mikie Sherrill on Tuesday became the latest House Democrat to call for President Joe Biden to step off the ticket.

“I know that President Biden and his team have been true public servants and have put the country and the best interests of democracy first and foremost in their considerations,” she said in a statement. “And because I know President Biden cares deeply about the future of our country, I am asking that he declare that he won’t run for reelection and will help lead us through a process toward a new nominee.”

Sherrill, who flipped a GOP-held seat in 2018 before it became bluer in redistricting, has been a key national security voice in the party. She’s now the seventh member of the House Democratic caucus to publicly call for Biden to drop out of the presidential race.

Chuck Schumer has the same three-word answer anytime he’s asked about the election prospects of President Joe Biden: “I’m with Joe.”

The Senate majority leader said the same phrase three times on Tuesday during his weekly press conference, when reporters asked about the incumbent’s viability in defeating former President Donald Trump.

“As I’ve said before, I’m with Joe,” Schumer said, declining to offer further insight into what Democrats discussed at their weekly lunch meeting.

Schumer declined to state whether he agreed with Sen. Patty Murray (D-Wash.), another member of Democratic leadership, that Biden “must do more” to reassure Democrats and needs to be “a much more forceful and energetic candidate on the campaign trail in the very near future.”

The New York Democrat has been sparing in his public comments about Biden since the president’s shaky debate performance against Trump. He’s offered some version of the line he used Tuesday during an event in upstate New York and then upon returning to Washington on Monday.

Biden waited nearly a week after his debate performance to call Schumer and other senior Democrats in Congress.

No Senate Democrats have publicly called for Biden to abandon his reelection bid, though plenty have expressed concerns publicly — and privately — about his ability to vigorously make the case against Trump as polls show the incumbent steadily trailing. Lawmakers were largely mum on their conference discussion as they exited lunches Tuesday afternoon.

The leadership-bucking House Freedom Caucus is facing a watershed moment, as several internal clashes risk ripping the group apart.

The intense flare-up centers around the Monday night ouster of Rep. Warren Davidson (R-Ohio), led by allies of Chair Bob Good (R-Va.), who is on the precipice of losing his own reelection bid. Davidson had endorsed Good’s primary challenger, John McGuire.

The 16-13 decision to remove Davidson — a move his allies felt bent the group’s bylaws, and took place when some Davidson supporters weren’t present — has members predicting that others will resign over the matter. One lawmaker already announced directly after the vote that they would: Rep. Troy Nehls (R-Texas).

“I’m sure we’ll have some,” Rep. Ralph Norman (R-S.C.) said about the possibility that more members will soon depart the group. “We’ve got a lot of issues to address.”

It’s not the first time the group has had tension recently, but the public comments underline just how strong the current divisions are, given the group’s typically secretive nature. Members were warned not to talk about the Davidson drama, according to two people in the group’s recent meetings, but frustrated lawmakers have still privately and publicly complained.

Generally, under the group’s bylaws, Freedom Caucus members are only found to not be in good standing — a label that makes it easier to oust someone — if they haven’t paid their dues or don’t attend meetings. That was not the case with Davidson. But Good’s allies felt Davidson’s endorsement constituted a clear betrayal and necessitated booting him, a decision that deeply divided the group.

Davidson’s most vocal ally, Rep. Jim Jordan (R-Ohio), made clear he disagreed with that choice. And he acknowledged the possibility that more of the roughly three dozen group members could head for the exits.

“I voted against it and spoke against it. … I’ve always been opposed to that,” Jordan said, referring to the ouster vote, adding that it was “unfortunate” that other members of the group were leaving.

A Freedom Caucus spokesperson responded to a request for comment by saying the group doesn’t discuss internal matters.

Even before the board tapped Good to become chair, the group’s membership has been having a long-simmering identity crisis. Norman, noting that there are “differences of opinion” within the group, floated that members were already likely to head for exits even before the Davidson fight. While the group was once considered a monolith, there are increasingly public clashes between the group’s old guard and newer members who were swept in during and after Donald Trump’s time in the White House.

Early fault lines occurred over tactics some in the group have deployed in order to make demands. Some of the most high-profile issues occurred when a subset of Freedom Caucus members helped block Kevin McCarthy from the speakership in January 2021, and then when five HFC members joined the effort to remove the Californian last fall.

There is also frustration about certain strategies members of the bloc have used on the House floor to push changes to legislation, including blocking party bills by tanking procedural votes. The group has split several times over whether or not they should be using hardball tactics like sinking legislation to send a message to leadership.

And the group even publicly and privately split over whether to back an unsuccessful bid to oust Speaker Mike Johnson earlier this year.

Tempers could cool if Good vacates his position as chair. He lost his primary by about 400 votes, a margin that allows him to request a recount. He’s publicly stated he plans to do so, though he has not yet officially triggered that process.

But Republican aides and HFC members are already privately questioning if he can remain as Freedom Caucus chair for the rest of the year if his election loss becomes official, private discussions that were first reported by POLITICO.

Because Good was initially elected to serve as chair through 2025, he will have to step down early unless he somehow wins a recount. Some members privately bet he remains chair through December and goes out swinging, while others believe he will be pushed out earlier if he officially loses.

Several names are being floated as a potential successor if Good exits early: Reps. Chip Roy (R-Texas), Andy Harris (R-Md.) and Lauren Boebert (R-Colo.).

House Republicans are openly skeptical of holding Attorney General Merrick Garland in “inherent contempt.” But they just might vote to do it this week.

Rep. Anna Paulina Luna (R-Fla.) is expected to trigger a vote Wednesday on her resolution, which would hold Garland in “inherent contempt” over the Justice Department’s refusal to hand over audio of President Joe Biden’s interview with former special counsel Robert Hur.

In a bid to assuage concerns from her GOP colleagues, Luna changed her resolution from allowing the House sergeant-at-arms to take Garland into custody to instead fining him $10,000 per day until he hands over the audio, which Biden has asserted executive privilege over.

The first draft of the resolution was expected to garner enough GOP opposition to tank it. But Republicans privately acknowledge there’s a chance Luna’s revised resolution could pass this week — not necessarily because GOP lawmakers enthusiastically support it, but because they won’t vote against it.

Speaker Mike Johnson, asked about Luna’s resolution, told reporters the resolution still gave him “pause” from a constitutional perspective, but he will support it if it comes to the floor. Because the resolution is privileged, Luna can force a vote without his support.

“If it’s brought to the floor, I will vote for it,” Johnson said.

Republicans can only lose a handful of members, given likely unanimous opposition from Democrats. So there’s still a chance Luna’s resolution could fail when it comes to the floor this week.

Dozens of Republicans were expected to vote against the initial version of Luna’s resolution. And while there is expected to be at least one GOP “no” vote on the new version, the pool of potential opponents is shrinking after the revision to the resolution and amid concerns about Biden’s mental acuity after a shaky debate.

In addition to Luna’s resolution, House Republicans have already voted to hold Garland in contempt, though the DOJ quickly noted the attorney general wouldn’t be prosecuted because the audio fell under executive privilege. It’s similar to the stance taken around contempt for then-Attorney General Bill Barr.

House Republicans also filed a lawsuit to ask the courts to force Garland to hand over the tapes. And GOP leadership, as well as rank-and-file members, have been trying to make the case that that route represents their best shot, predicting their “inherent contempt” resolution would end up getting litigated in court anyways.

“I think it’s strategically bad. … I think we’re going to have to sue to enforce it, which means we’ll be suing on the same issue two different times. And I think this case is significantly worse than the other case,” said Rep. Kelly Armstrong (R-N.D.).

President Joe Biden’s reelection bid faces a key stress test Tuesday, as House and Senate Democrats huddle separately for frank discussions about their party’s standard bearer — and whether he can effectively challenge former President Donald Trump this fall.

First up are House Democrats at a meeting Tuesday morning off the Hill. Senate Democrats will then gather for their weekly caucus luncheon in the early afternoon.

Biden huddled with the Congressional Black Caucus on Monday evening, arguably his most loyal group of supporters on the Hill. But many Democrats — even those publicly supportive of the president — are still privately worried about his candidacy.

One eye-catching comment came from Sen. Patty Murray (D-Wash.), a disciplined party messenger and president pro tem of the Senate. “I believe President Biden must do more to demonstrate he can campaign strong enough to beat Donald Trump,” she said in a statement. “We need to see a much more forceful and energetic candidate on the campaign trail in the very near future … President Biden must seriously consider the best way to preserve his incredible legacy and secure it for the future.”

Biden, of course, has remained resolute, saying he has no intention of abandoning his reelection bid. But he has thus far not indicated any plans to address Democrats in person.

In non-Biden news: The House will hold two series of votes in the afternoon and consider legislation revoking energy efficiency standards for dishwashers and refrigerators.

Over in the Senate, lawmakers will vote on the nomination of Patricia Lee to be a member of the Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board, and in the afternoon will consider two judicial nominations.

Democratic Rep. Ruben Gallego raised a whopping $10.4 million for his Arizona Senate bid in the second quarter.

That’s his largest quarterly fundraising total this cycle and brings his total raised to $31 million, according to numbers shared first with POLITICO. Gallego ended June with $9.2 million in cash on hand.

Gallego is battling Republican Kari Lake for retiring independent Sen. Kyrsten Sinema’s seat. Gallego is running unopposed for the Democratic nomination in this month’s primary, while Lake is the heavy favorite in the GOP race.

Nearly 50 percent of Gallego’s 119,000 donors were giving to his bid for the first time, a statistic the campaign pointed to as a sign of momentum. And 95 percent of donations were $100 or less.

Democrats have felt increasingly optimistic about their odds in Arizona, especially with Lake as the likely Republican nominee. She struggled to court independents and moderates in her 2022 gubernatorial campaign, though the Senate GOP campaign arm announced last month that it plans to purchase air time to support her.

Gallego has so far outraised Lake each quarter. In the first three months of the year he raised $7.5 million to Lake’s $3.6 million. Their reports are due to the Federal Election Commission on July 15.

The Congressional Leadership Fund, a top House GOP super PAC and its sister group, American Action Network, raised $58 million over the past three months.

Of that total, $46.4 million comes from CLF — which is the largest second quarter in the group’s history. Together CLF and AAN have raised $200 million to date since the start of 2023.

CLF has close ties to Speaker Mike Johnson and is the biggest spender in congressional races for the GOP. And when chaos engulfed the House Republican Conference with Kevin McCarthy’s ouster, there were serious questions about the group’s ability to keep raising money.

But the fundraising totals are the latest sign that the turmoil hasn’t spooked donors and choked their coffers too much.

The two GOP groups beat their Democratic counterparts last quarter. House Majority PAC and its allied House Majority Forward raised $51 million.

CLF’s latest campaign finance report, which will cover activity from April 1-June 30, is due to the Federal Election Commission on July 15.