Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s office on Friday dismissed as “absolute fake news” a report it is negotiating with Egypt over withdrawing its troops from the eight-mile corridor dividing the two countries as part of ongoing talks over a Gaza cease-fire and hostage-release deal.

“The Prime Minister insists that Israel remain on the Philadelphi Corridor,” as the area is known, a statement from Netanyahu’s office said. It came in response to a Reuters report that Israeli withdrawal from the Gaza side of the border was the focus of negotiations throughout the day in Cairo.

Insistence that Israeli troops will remain in the corridor is one of several snags that have dampened last week’s optimism that an agreement to stop the fighting could be imminent. Egyptian state television, citing an unidentified official, said that “disputed points go beyond what was previously agreed upon with the mediators,” which include the United States, Qatar and Egypt.

President Biden, at his Thursday news conference marking the conclusion of this week’s NATO summit, voiced confidence that a deal was within reach, saying the “framework” of the cease-fire plan he laid out six weeks ago “is now agreed on by both Israel and Hamas.” While “there are still gaps to close,” Biden said, “we’re making progress, the trend is positive.”

Just hours before Biden spoke, White House national security adviser Jake Sullivan also cited “positive” signs, but said that “‘optimistic’ is always a hard word to use in a sentence around this tragic conflict.”

“I think there’s still miles to go before we close, if we are able to close,” Sullivan said.

U.S. and Arab officials said that while the two sides were closer than they have been, Israel had interjected new conditions to the proposal’s broad outline and both sides had balked on some of the details during talks that took place this week in Cairo and Doha. The officials spoke on the condition of anonymity about the sensitive negotiations.

Meanwhile, Israeli media, reflecting ongoing tension between Netanyahu and the leadership of the Israel Defense Forces, quoted anonymous military officials accusing the prime minister of intentionally seeking to stall the process. The officials spoke on the condition of anonymity about the sensitive negotiations.

“The ball is in Netanyahu’s court,” said a former senior Egyptian official with knowledge of the negotiations. “Netanyahu does not want peace. That is all. He will find excuses … to prolong this war until 5 November,” the date of the U.S. presidential election. Polls show Biden trailing his opponent, former president Donald Trump, whose Republican Party has been less critical of Israel’s conduct in the war.

In a statement Thursday, Hamas accused Netanyahu of “procrastination to buy time with the aim of thwarting this round of negotiations.”

The families of dozens of hostages who remain in Hamas captivity have been at the forefront of escalating demonstrations in Israel demanding that Netanyahu complete the deal, with some accusing him of holding back to keep his government from falling in the face of pressure from extreme right-wing coalition partners who oppose an agreement. The ongoing war has also shifted attention away from corruption charges that also threaten his hold on power.

Netanyahu is scheduled to travel to Washington to address a joint session of Congress on July 24, and it is unclear whether Biden, whose relationship with the Israeli leader has become more strained as the war’s civilian toll has grown, will hold a formal meeting with him. “We believe that they will have some engagement,” White House spokeswomen Karine Jean-Pierre told reporters Friday. “I just don’t have anything to announce at this time.”

“He’s going to use his U.S. visit to salvage his political situation internally as much as he can,” an Arab official said. “He’s going to keep his coalition together until he finds some allies that could come along and compensate if he needs to.”

The three-phase plan announced by Biden on May 31 includes a six-week initial stage with a cease-fire and a surge in humanitarian aid. Israeli forces would withdraw from all populated areas, and female, elderly and wounded hostages held in Gaza would be exchanged for hundreds of Palestinian prisoners held in Israel. Palestinians would also have free passage to return to their homes in areas that have long been blocked by Israeli troops.

Assuming no violations occurred, the six-week cease-fire would continue indefinitely as the parties negotiated a second phase that calls for a “permanent” truce, which would include a complete Israeli withdrawal and the release of remaining hostages. A third phase would begin internationally financed Gaza reconstruction, new Palestinian governance for the enclave and the eventual establishment of an independent Palestinian state.

While the administration has long accused Hamas of holding up a deal that it said Israel had already agreed to, the militant leadership late last week dropped a demand that an end state of permanent cease-fire and full Israeli withdrawal be guaranteed before it would enter the first phase. The Biden administration characterized the move as a “significant adjustment” in Hamas’s negotiating position and sent its chief negotiator, CIA Director William J. Burns, back to the region.

Burns has now returned to Washington. Brett McGurk, the National Security Council’s Mideast chief, continued talks in Cairo Friday.

Israel’s Philadelphi Corridor demand, among several Israeli red lines Netanyahu announced in a Thursday speech to newly graduating IDF officers, would appear to violate conditions outlined in the framework plan. While Egypt and Israel were said to be close to an agreement on adjustments to border security to prevent Hamas smuggling, including electronic and physical barriers, an Israeli military presence there would also violate preexisting border agreements.

Far from a permanent cease-fire, Netanyahu insisted Israel be able to “return to the fight” following the release of hostages “until all the objectives of the war are achieved.”

Negotiators were said to be trying to find a way around his insistence that Israel would “not allow the return of armed terrorists and the entry of war materiel to the northern Gaza Strip” in order to permit hundreds of thousands of Gazans who fled Israeli attacks in the north earlier this year to return home, as the proposed agreement stipulates.

“We may have moved from the performative phase of negotiations — each side trying to pin the collapse of the deal on the other — to something that is actually headed to an agreement,” said Aaron David Miller, a former U.S. adviser and negotiator in the Middle East. “The danger now is that each side, especially Netanyahu, will ask for too much and create a self-reinforcing race to the bottom and a cratering of the entire process.”

Meanwhile, the war that shifted in early May from northern Gaza to Rafah in the far south, where at least 1.5 million Palestinians had taken refuge, has now returned to northern areas that Israel had once declared clear of Hamas.

Two days after the Israeli military issued a sweeping directive for all Palestinians to leave Gaza City, suggesting intensified military operations to come in what was once the northern population hub, the families that remained there were sheltering in bomb- and bullet-slashed buildings, Louise Wateridge, a spokesperson for the United Nations agency for Palestinian refugees, said Friday.

After nine months of war, the city is one of the most deprived in Gaza — mostly cut off from international aid deliveries, and with entire streets flattened by Israeli airstrikes.

Wateridge said that families she met there were living in dire conditions. Several women she spoke with described traumatic births without health care; girls spoke of enduring their periods without access to clean water or any sanitary products.

As the United Nations convoy approached the city, its aid workers saw some Palestinian families leaving on foot, apparently in search of refuge further south. They held their hands in the air as they walked toward Israeli military checkpoints, she said. The air was baking, and there was little shade. “Every group we saw had young children. And the children were often carrying white flags on sticks, made out of whatever white fabric that they were able to find,” she said.

Louisa Loveluck in London, Heba Mahfouz in Cairo and Lior Soroka in Tel Aviv contributed to this report.

Senate Majority Leader Charles E. Schumer has been firmly repeating one simple phrase when asked about whether President Biden should step aside from his campaign: “I’m with Joe.”

But behind the scenes, the New York Democrat has left himself plenty of room to maneuver as he faces immense pressure from some Democratic senators and donors to convey a message to Biden to abandon his campaign after his faltering debate performance two weeks ago. A Thursday evening news conference in which Biden elaborated on foreign policy questions, though stumbled over some answers, hadn’t publicly changed much as of midday Friday.

“I think Chuck Schumer’s in a unique position,” said Sen. Alex Padilla (D-Calif.), one of Biden’s loudest supporters in the Senate, when asked if he believes Schumer wants Biden to stay in the race. “He uniquely among Senate Democrats is also working to ensure we maintain the majority this November. In my opinion, those two things are not at odds. … The way Chuck Schumer thinks about it might be slightly different.”

A naturally cautious leader, Schumer didn’t publicly comment following Biden’s news conference. And unlike House Democratic leader Hakeem Jeffries (N.Y.), he did not go to the White House to personally deliver a message to the president about where his members stood. But as time wears on and Biden’s political crisis continues, there are signs that Schumer’s stance may be shifting.

In a private lunch Tuesday, two of Schumer’s most vulnerable incumbents up for reelection — Sens. Sherrod Brown (D-Ohio) and Jon Tester (D-Mont.) — bluntly told the caucus that Biden would lose to former president Donald Trump, according to three people familiar the meeting. One senator made the point that even if all of Democratic incumbents won their tough races, that would still only produce a 50-50 Senate, which means Republicans would have the majority if Biden is ousted from the White House.

“President Biden’s bad debate performance raised serious questions about whether he’s up for the job for the next four years,” Tester said in a statement after the meeting. “He needs to prove to the American people, and me, that he can do it.”

Nonetheless, Schumer is urging senators to be cautious and hold their fire as he guides them through a politically perilous moment with an unclear endgame. But he is also taking in public and private polling and data showing Biden’s effect on key swing state Senate races, according to people familiar with his thinking. It has all left some in the Senate — as well as some donors — with the impression that the majority leader is keeping the door open to a change at the top of the ticket.

Schumer is a skilled fundraiser who helped build and maintain the Democratic Senate majority. Now he has to figure out how to preserve it — or as much of it as he can — with Senate Democrats and challengers already wary of being dragged down by Biden in key states where they are outperforming him.

At times, Democratic senators have not been exactly clear where he stands on the path forward for the party. Schumer has mostly been in listening mode, they said. The usually press-happy politician has avoided the spotlight on Biden’s fate as well, as he finds himself in the uncomfortable position of no longer being closely aligned with a president who he’s worked hand-in-glove with over the past four years to pass an ambitious liberal legislative agenda.

“With something as complex as this situation, his inclination is not to stake out a bold position and then cajole the caucus to come along,” said Matt House, a former top aide to Schumer. “He likes to listen to his members very carefully, likes to facilitate discussion, and he prefers caucus unity wherever possible.”

Schumer’s top priority is protecting the five vulnerable Democratic senators running for reelection, and that’s made him wary of rushing into action on Biden, several people close to him have said. In the days after the debate, as Democrats began floating replacing Biden with Vice President Harris, Schumer encouraged senators to wait for more data before reacting publicly.

“It’s a more complicated calculus for him because you have to balance what the top of the ticket is — Biden or Harris — and then you have to go race by race,” said one person close to Senate leadership, who — like others in the article — spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss private conversations. “He wants the benefit of clarity instead of the fog of war.”

Schumer obtained data points that show Biden’s shrinking path to 270 electoral votes after the debate, according to three people familiar with his thinking.

But it takes more time to get enough information from swing states to analyze how taking the dramatic step of changing a presidential ticket less than four months before an election would impact different Senate incumbents in diverse states.

Christie Roberts, the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee’s executive director, told Bloomberg News that internal data since the debate shows Senate races “holding steady or even moved a little in our direction in the last two weeks,” indicating that voters are prepared to split their ticket between races for president or Senate.

Initial data had suggested senators in Montana, Ohio and Nevada would not be helped by having Harris instead of Biden running at the top of the ticket, two people close to Senate leadership said. The political situation is incredibly fluid, however, and it will take time to see the full picture.

“I don’t think anything he does right now to add to the panic is useful,” a second person in constant contact with senators and aides said.

The majority leader is in frequent contact with White House Chief of Staff Jeff Zients and adviser Steve Ricchetti but has only spoken directly with the president once since the debate, according to a person familiar with the outreach. Congressional Democrats have complained about the lack of contact from Bidenworld in the debate’s immediate aftermath, though communication has increased. There is a sense that the White House and Biden’s top aides are too isolated from the reality of the situation, Hill Democrats said.

Biden has also made it clear that only hard data will convince him to leave the race, not the opinions of Hill Democrats, Sen. Chris Coons (D-Del.), the campaign’s co-chair, has told his colleagues. And Democrats are aware that ultimately the decision to step aside is Biden’s to make.

At the news conference, Biden said he would only drop out if the data says that “there’s no way” he can win.

“They’re not saying that,” Biden said. “No poll says that.”

So far, just one senator, Peter Welch (D-Vt.), has called on Biden to step aside — although a majority of the caucus is concerned the president cannot win in 2024, according to multiple senators and aides.

As donors and senators bombard Schumer with their concerns, he’s urged them to directly contact the White House, rather than offering to be their messenger, according to two people familiar with the conversations.

Donors are more focused on Schumer’s expensive battle to save his narrow majority. Angsty and angry large-dollar donors who want Biden to step aside are in a holding pattern, hoping to pressure the president out of the race, according to multiple people who are responsible for courting large campaign contributions. Donor anxiety is trickling down to at least one Senate campaign and to the anti-Trump super PAC American Bridge 21st Century, which have both seen the effects of a fundraising freeze, according to two people familiar with the fundraising.

Schumer, who raised hundreds of millions of dollars to win the Senate, has seemed to share donors’ concerns at times. Some donors said they believed the majority leader was open to a change at the top of the ticket, Axios reported.

“As I have made clear repeatedly publicly and privately, I support President Biden and remain committed to ensuring Donald Trump is defeated in November,” Schumer said in a statement this week.

Multiple major donors have communicated that they are increasing their commitment to Senate Democrats and have sent new six-figure donations, one national Democrat with knowledge of Senate races said. One major donor increased their support to the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee following the debate by 50 percent, this person said. Part of the motivation behind the increased giving was the Supreme Court’s decision on presidential immunity and the Senate’s role in confirming high court justices.

Schumer invited top Biden campaign officials Ricchetti, Mike Donilon and Jen O’Malley Dillon to talk to his angry caucus so that they could make their concerns known directly to the inner circle of the campaign. In the tense meeting Thursday, several senators expressed their deep concern that Biden could be a drag on Democrats’ chance to win the Senate.

“The polling is really what’s driving this discussion,” one national Democratic official said. “Chuck is leaning more into the position of making clear to Biden what his problems are.”

Paul Kane contributed to this report.

Welcome to The Campaign Moment, your guide to the biggest developments in the … still kind of close, but perhaps deceptively so? … 2024 election.

(Did a friend forward this to you, or are you reading this online? If so, sign up for the newsletter here. You can also hear my analysis on the Campaign Moment podcast on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, or wherever else you get your podcasts. We’ve got a new episode today!)

The big moment

It’s getting closer to fish-or-cut-bait time for President Biden and the Democrats, and the events of the past two days have only compounded their dilemma. Call it “purgatory” or call it “limbo”; Democrats are in it.

On the one hand, a significant and still-growing number of Democrats (22) had called for Biden to drop out as of Friday afternoon, citing concerns about his ability to campaign and even do his job, and many others have rather suggestively questioned whether he can win.

On the other, Biden gave a mostly capable, hour-long news conference (some high-profile gaffes aside) Thursday night that could soothe some jittery Democrats. The lack of the predicted cascade of defections on Capitol Hill nearly 24 hours after the news conference is interesting, though much of that drama is playing out behind closed doors.

And now, new polling, including a Washington Post-ABC News-Ipsos survey suggests both that the race might have shifted less than we previously thought and remains a competitive one, especially nationally. Biden’s head-to-head performance compared with Donald Trump even ticked up slightly in Friday’s NPR-PBS-Marist College poll, which he led by a statistically insignificant two points.

Given all of this, I think it’s good time to take a look at The Post’s great new polling average tool (bookmark it, share it, debate it) and what the fuller data really says about where we stand.

The top-line finding is that, across 10 quality surveys conducted both before and after the debate two weeks ago, Biden’s deficit has grown by an average of 1.9 points. He was trailing by less than a point before; he now trails by 2.6 points in those surveys.

All of these shifts are within the margin of error, but the large number of polls we have make it pretty evident that Biden lost at least some ground since his debate performance two weeks ago shook the political world.

In addition, the president lost ground in eight of the 10 polls. The Marist poll is the only one he’s gained in. A CNN poll showed an unchanged race, but that’s after it already had him trailing by six points, a pretty large margin at the time. (That might suggest CNN’s pre-debate poll was a bit of an outlier.)

But Biden is doing slightly better in The Post’s overall polling average — which pulls in all qualifying polls, not just the ones conducted before and after the debate. He trails there by one point.

The polls also show that, even if the margin hasn’t shifted much, reservations about Biden have. For instance, The Post-ABC-Ipsos poll is a relatively good one for Biden, showing a tie. But it also showed more than 8 in 10 voters saying he’s too old — higher than most previous polls — and 56 percent of Democrats said he should step aside. The percentage of voters who said Biden was mentally sharper than Trump dropped significantly, to just 14 percent. Half of independents said the debate made them view Biden less favorably; very few became more favorable toward him.

And of course, even if the race is that close nationally, it’s a bit of a mirage. That’s because Democrats probably need to win the popular vote by a few points to win the presidency.

Remember that Democrats won the popular vote by two points in 2016, but still lost the electoral college. And back in 2020 Biden won nationally by 4.5 points, but he won the three decisive states — Arizona, Georgia and Wisconsin — by 0.6 points or less. Shift the entire electorate just a point to the right in 2020 and Trump wins.

(Indeed, the actual closeness of that race has passed many people by. My favorite stat: If you shift just 43,000 votes in those three states, Trump wins. If you shift just 90,000 votes overall, Republicans win not only the presidency, but also both the House and the Senate.)

Those two results suggest Democrats probably need to lead by around three or four points nationally to actually be “winning,” practically speaking. Regrettably, we have very little high-quality, post-debate data in the swing states, most of which Biden has trailed in.

And that’s why even a slight-but-real shift against Biden is so troublesome for Democrats. He was already behind, after all, and now he appears to be behind more. The polls suggest the margin has shifted against Biden by more than five points from a pretty tightly decided 2020 election.

Which brings us to the big caveats.

Maybe the polls are generally off by a few points — as they have been before — and Biden’s actually doing better. It’s harder and harder to poll these days. (Of course, Biden could also be doing worse; Trump over-performed the polls in both 2016 and 2020.)

And maybe the fact that Biden’s two best recent high-quality polls — the Post-ABC-Ipsos and Marist polls — are the leading edge of the race reverting to the mean. These are the two most recent polls, so maybe the debate temporarily chilled Biden’s support, but it’s now thawing a bit and the race is getting back to “normal.”

Whatever the case, the right call for Biden and Democrats is hardly as clear as it might have seemed even just a few days ago. And Biden has some things he can credibly point to to at least buy some time. The ideal outcomes for twitchy Democrats would have been either no impact (in which case Biden stays) or a big shift (in which case it’s clear he goes). They’re basically smack-dab in the middle of those two outcomes.

The wait continues.

(In the meantime, keep a close eye on our polling averages, which will be updated with all the important data.)

A momentous quote

“Like most people I represent in Southwest Washington, I doubt the president’s judgment about his health, his fitness to do the job, and whether he is the one making important decisions about our country, rather than unelected advisers. … The crisis of confidence in the president’s leadership needs to come to an end. The president should do what he knows is right for the country and put the national interest first.”

-Rep. Marie Gluesenkamp Perez (D-Wash.) in a statement Thursday — before Biden’s news conference — suggesting not just that Biden should drop out, but should resign. It’s one of the strongest statements from a Democrat to date.

Take a moment to read:

• “Inside the glitzy fundraiser where Biden lost George Clooney” (Washington Post)
• “Project 2025’ gets traction — thanks in part to Trump” (Washington Post)
• “‘Unfit’ to serve, ‘con artist’: How Trump’s VP finalists once bashed him” (Washington Post)
• “‘It’s Like Being Liberated’: Republicans Bask in the Glow of a Democratic Meltdown” (Politico)
• “The Trump National Convention” (Atlantic)

Meta announced Friday it’s rolling back heightened restrictions on former president Donald Trump’s social media accounts — an effort to give the Republican presidential contender more leeway to share content in a heated campaign season.

The social media giant said it’s loosening the more rigorous consequences for Trump if he breaks their content rules, such as those that bar hate speech, incitement to violence and voter suppression. The heightened penalties facing Trump’s accounts were introduced following his two-year suspension from Facebook and Instagram.

The move is likely to exacerbate scrutiny facing Meta as it seeks to balance its desire of showing important political speech to users against its goal of reducing dangerous rhetoric online. Meta has long been reluctant to police speech from politicians, preferring a hands-off approach that allows their words — no matter how controversial — to be left on its platforms.

“With the party conventions taking place shortly, including the Republican convention next week, the candidates for President of the United States will soon be formally nominated,” Meta Global Affairs President Nick Clegg said in a statement.

“In assessing our responsibility to allow political expression, we believe that the American people should be able to hear from the nominees for President on the same basis.”

The heightened penalties facing Trump’s accounts were imposed in 2023 after Meta lifted the two-year ban on Trump. Meta first suspended Trump’s accounts on Jan. 7, 2021, following his praise and encouragement of rioters who stormed the Capitol in an attack that left several dead. The company then extended the suspension for two years — which was lifted last year.

Once Trump’s suspension was lifted, Meta said Trump and any other leaders whose accounts were reinstated after a suspension would face harsher penalties if they broke the company’s rules again. For instance, the company said that most new violations would trigger a one-month restriction from posting, and could for more serious violation merit another 2-year restriction.

The company also introduced a range of other potential consequences for politicians that who post things that don’t break its content rules but still pose a risk. The company said it could still limit the distribution of those posts, restrict a leader’s access to its advertising tools, remove the reshare button from contentious posts or stop them from being recommended.

Meta said Friday the company has not had to impose any more punishments against Trump’s accounts since they were reinstated. Meta added that both Biden and Trump would still be subject to the company’s rules against spreading hate speech or inciting violence.

Trump has been sharing fewer posts on Twitter, Facebook or YouTube during this election than he had previously, preferring to post his most controversial rhetoric on his own social network, Truth Social. Though he still posts videos of his rallies and some criticism of President Biden on Facebook and Instagram.

DETROIT — President Biden on Friday faced a continuing drip of statements from Democrats urging him to step aside as their presidential nominee, as at least two more lawmakers joined the calls for him to end his candidacy and underlined that this week’s high-stakes news conference had not squelched concerns in the party that he would struggle to defeat Donald Trump.

Friday’s two defectors — Reps. Brittany Pettersen (D-Colo.) and Mike Levin (D-Calif.) — joined three of their Democratic colleagues who had asked Biden to pull out Thursday night after the news conference concluded. In all, 21 House members had urged the president to reconsider his candidacy as of late Friday — about 10 percent of all House Democrats — as well as one senator, Peter Welch of Vermont.

The reviews of Biden’s performance Thursday were mixed, as he showed a command of complex foreign policy issues but stumbled through some answers and mixed up names. That was not enough for lawmakers like Petterson, who represents a relatively safe district in Colorado.

“Joe Biden saved our country once, and I’m joining the growing number of people in my district and across the country to ask him to do it again,” she said Friday morning. “Please pass the torch to one of our many capable Democratic leaders so we have the best chance to defeat Donald Trump.”

Petterson was followed later in the day by Levin, who represents a swing district and rarely speaks out on divisive issues. “Making this statement is not easy,” said Levin, adding that he had talked to several hundred constituents and supporters about the matter. “I have deep respect for President Biden’s five-plus decades of public service … But I believe the time has come for President Biden to pass the torch.”

They joined Democratic Reps. Jim Himes of Connecticut, Scott Peters of California and Eric Sorensen of Illinois, who had made similar statements shortly after Biden’s news conference ended Thursday. The drumbeat of disaffection is creating an increasingly damaging dynamic for Biden and the Democratic Party, producing regular criticism without altering the campaign’s trajectory or visibly affecting the president’s determination to stay in the race.

But party leaders appear uncertain how to change that.

House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-N.Y.), in a letter to colleagues Friday, said he had met privately with Biden the previous night to discuss the election and convey the sentiments of his fellow Democratic lawmakers. Jeffries did not specify what he had told the president or how Biden had responded, but his letter notably did not urge Biden to stay in the race or say that House Democrats were behind his candidacy.

“I directly expressed the full breadth of insight, heartfelt perspectives and conclusions about the path forward that the Caucus has shared in our recent time together,” Jeffries wrote in his “Dear Colleague” letter.

That left the landscape where it has been for some time: A Democratic Party deeply divided over the path forward, with the prospect of a second Trump presidency, which most Democrats consider catastrophic, hanging over every move.

The president continued his behind-the-scenes effort to shore up his support, joining a virtual meeting with BOLD PAC, a group affiliated with the Congressional Hispanic Caucus. Biden also delivered remarks and took questions during a virtual meeting with leaders from the Congressional Asian Pacific American Caucus and members of that bloc’s political arm.

Biden then headed to Michigan for a late-afternoon rally, part of his ongoing effort to dispel questions about his vigor and ability to wage a robust campaign. He planned to focus on Project 2025, a document assembled by the conservative Heritage Foundation as a proposed agenda should Trump retake the White House.

“Folks, Project 2025 is the biggest attack on our system of government and on our personal freedom that has ever been proposed in the history of this country,” Biden planned to say, according to excerpts released by the campaign. The document contains such goals as sharp limits on abortion and cutting funds to fight climate change and provide health care for the LGBTQ community.

“It’s time for us to stop treating politics like its entertainment or a reality TV show,” Biden plans to continue. “Another four years of Donald Trump is deadly serious. Project 2025 is deadly serious.”

On the way to the rally, Biden stopped by a campaign organizing event in a Detroit suburb, joking twice about his age and ending his 14-minute remarks by reassuring organizers that he’s “okay.”

“That’s why I’m running to finish this job. There’s more to do. I know I’m only 41,” Biden said. “I promise you I’m okay.”

Earlier in his remarks, as he touted his administration’s accomplishments on health care, the economy and manufacturing, he joked that he was “270 years old.”

Biden walked around the room as he spoke, stopping by each table full of organizers. He spoke about the times he said pundits, reporters and strategists had doubted him, adding that he had a record of overcoming such doubts, including in the 2020 presidential race.

“With age comes a little wisdom,” Biden said. Referring to Trump, he added, “The alternative is not much of an alternative.”

Earlier, in a news conference on Air Force One, campaign spokesman Michael Tyler said the president hoped to make the case to doubters, including the Congress members asking him to step aside, that he deserved another four years.

“The president understands there’s still some anxiety on the Hill. I think we all understand that,” Tyler said. “That’s why he’s laser-focused on demonstrating that he’s the best person to take on Donald Trump.”

Rep. Debbie Dingell (D-Mich.) said that despite troubling polls for Democrats in Michigan, a state Biden almost certainly must win to retake the White House, the state remains “competitive.”

Some Democrats said they were looking forward to Trump’s imminent announcement of a running mate and to the Republican National Convention taking place next week, hoping that would shift some of the nation’s focus to the GOP’s own vulnerabilities, including Trump’s own misstatements and often rambling speeches.

Following several days of shocked silence after Biden’s debate performance against Trump on June 27, when he struggled to find words and complete sentences, a steady stream of Democrats have said publicly that Biden should step aside and let someone else head the party’s ticket, starting with Rep. Lloyd Doggett (D-Texas) on July 2.

Hours before Thursday’s news conference, four more Democratic House lawmakers joined that chorus, voicing fears that Biden would have difficulty defeating Trump because of voters’ concerns about his age. Biden is 81 and Trump is 78, but polls suggest voters are significantly more worried about Biden’s capacity than Trump’s.

Biden began the news conference by touting his accomplishments at this week’s NATO summit and his broader record as president, providing an implicit defense of his continued candidacy. But early on in the question-and-answer session, he mistakenly referred to Vice President Harris as “Vice President Trump,” a verbal slip that elicited audible gasps in the room and frustration from already-nervous Democrats.

He took issue with a report that he had told a group of supporters he needed to end his days at 8 p.m.

“What I said was, instead of my every day starting at 7 and going to bed at midnight, it would be smarter for me to pace myself a little more,” Biden said. “Instead of starting a fundraiser at 9 o’clock, start it at 8 o’clock — people get to go home by 10 o’clock. That’s what I’m talking about.”

Biden also delivered lengthy, complex answers to a range of foreign policy questions and argued forcefully that he is the most qualified person to defeat Trump and govern the country. Aides seized on those answers, saying they should lay to rest any questions that may have arisen after the debate about the president’s intellectual capacity and mental agility.

The president’s visit to Michigan, however, could highlight another key political vulnerability, one that was bedeviling his campaign well before the June debate: Arab Americans, Muslims and liberals deeply angered by his response to Israel’s war in Gaza. Many have said they will withhold their votes because of his failure to call for a permanent cease-fire and cut off U.S. military aid to Israel.

More than 38,000 Palestinians have died in the enclave in the past nine months according to the Gaza Health Ministry. Israel launched a punishing military assault in Gaza after Hamas militants crossed the border into Israel on Oct. 7, killing 1,200 people and taking some 250 hostage.

Michigan is home to the country’s largest Arab American population, with about 300,000 people who claim ancestry from the Middle East or North Africa. Michigan’s Arab and Muslim community overwhelmingly supported Biden in 2020, when he won the state by 154,000 votes.

Abdullah Hammoud, the mayor of Dearborn, Mich. — where Arab Americans make up the majority of the population — said he has not spoken to White House officials for several months about his constituents’ concerns over the war in Gaza. Even as Gaza receded from the headlines in recent weeks, Hammoud said, the situation on the ground has continued to worsen and residents have not lost focus on the issue.

“Earlier this year, the president sent his senior White House officials to listen to the constituency he sought support from four years ago, and there have been no meaningful steps since. Things have only gone backward,” Hammoud said, referring to a Feb. 8 meeting in which senior national security officials visited Dearborn and met with the mayor and other officials.

“We’re looking for a president with the backbone to call for a cease-fire,” Hammoud added. “This is not the president that was promised to us four years ago.”

Most public polls show Biden trailing Trump in Michigan, which is key to the president’s narrowing path to victory — he has few, if any, paths without it.

The Biden campaign argued in a memo obtained by The Washington Post on Thursday that it can win by focusing on the “blue wall” states of Michigan, Wisconsin and Pennsylvania.

A federal judge in New York on Friday threw out Rudy Giuliani’s bankruptcy case, paving the way for a litany of creditors, including two former Georgia election workers who won a $148 million defamation claim against him, to pursue and potentially seize his assets.

The decision by U.S. Bankruptcy Judge Sean Lane in the Southern District of New York comes nearly seven months after Giuliani sought bankruptcy protection after he was ordered to immediately pay millions in damages to Ruby Freeman and Shaye Moss, two Georgia women he falsely accused of helping to steal the 2020 presidential election.

In his 22-page order, Lane cited Giuliani’s “continued failure to meet his reporting obligations and provide the financial transparency required of a debtor in possession” and called his behavior “troubling.” It restricts Giuliani from seeking bankruptcy protection for one year.

A spokesman for Giuliani did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

Lane’s written ruling came amid claims by Giuliani’s creditors that the former New York mayor and personal lawyer to former president Donald Trump had used the proceedings to hide details about his assets and avoid paying the former election workers.

Friday’s order would allow Freeman and Moss and other creditors to pursue legal remedies to collect money owed to them by Giuliani. It also allows other pending lawsuits against the former mayor that had been frozen by the bankruptcy proceeding to resume, including defamation suits by the voting machine companies Dominion Voting Systems and Smartmatic and a sexual harassment and wage theft claim by former Giuliani associate Nicole Dunphy.

All are part of a committee of “unsecured creditors” that had sought relief in the bankruptcy case.

A committee of other Giuliani creditors had pressed for the bankruptcy case to continue and for a trustee to be appointed to oversee Giuliani’s finances. They argued it would be the only way to get a full and accurate picture of Giuliani’s cash and assets after months in which the former mayor filed inconsistent and incomplete financial statements and failed to turn over financial information about his businesses and other holdings.

But in his Friday ruling, Lane rejected that proposal, saying there was “little reason to conclude that the Mr. Giuliani’s uncooperative conduct will change” even with the appointment of an outside trustee.

“Mr. Giuliani has failed to provide an accurate and complete picture of his financial affairs in the six months that this case has been pending,” the judge wrote. “Transparency into Mr. Giuliani’s finances has proven to be an elusive goal.”

Citing suspicions that Giuliani’s stonewalling was an attempt to hide money, lawyers for the creditors hired investigators made up of former CIA and FBI officials to look for hidden assets. They sought to question individuals who Giuliani has done business with — including My Pillow CEO Mike Lindell, a fellow election denier and Trump associate who was subpoenaed last month. And they have suggested they could sue parties that Giuliani claims owe him money as part of their effort to recover debts — potentially including Trump.

In a February court hearing, Giuliani claimed Trump still owes him “about” $2 million in unpaid legal fees related to his work seeking to overturn Trump’s 2020 election loss — though he suggested that debt is with the Trump campaign or the Republican National Committee. But in a Feb. 27 court filing, Giuliani noted a possible claim against Trump personally for unpaid legal fees.

In dismissing the case, Lane cited the potential challenges of trying to recoup fees Giuliani says he is owed by Trump and the RNC, describing the investigation and potential recovery as “complex matters with uncertain outcomes.”

In court documents, Giuliani has listed roughly $153 million in debts to at least 20 people and businesses, including Moss and Freeman. A list of top creditors filed in February said Giuliani owes more than $3.7 million in unpaid legal fees to three law firms — though he is disputing some of those bills — and more than $1 million in state and federal taxes.

The former mayor and federal prosecutor has claimed about $11 million in assets — including an estimated $5.6 million New York apartment and a Palm Beach, Fla., condo he has valued at $3.5 million. While Giuliani has put his New York property on the market, he has so far successfully resisted selling his Florida home, with one of his lawyers claiming the sale could render the former mayor “homeless.”

A financial disclosure report filed last month said Giuliani had less than $100,000 in the bank at the end of May and was funding his living expenses through a rapidly diminishing retirement account.

But creditors have repeatedly complained that Giuliani has not filed a complete picture of his net worth, as is required in bankruptcy proceedings, and have sought information on his businesses and investments.

Both creditors and the judge criticized Giuliani for blowing off court deadlines and filing incomplete and inconsistent monthly financial disclosures that have raised questions about his spending and income. In response, Giuliani’s lawyers have cited administrative struggles, including problems hiring an accountant.

“Since day one, Giuliani has regarded this case and the bankruptcy process as a joke, hiding behind the facade of an elderly, doddering man who cannot even remember the address for his second multimillion dollar home and claims impending homelessness if he must sell that second multimillion dollar home,” Philip C. Dublin, an attorney for the committee of creditors, wrote in a July 8 court filing that accused Giuliani of treating the bankruptcy process “with utter disrespect and without accountability.”

In recent weeks, Giuliani repeatedly shifted legal strategies in the case. In December, he sought Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection, which allows an individual to reorganize and file a plan to pay off debts. But on July 1, Giuliani changed course, asking a judge to reclassify his case under Chapter 7 bankruptcy, which would hand control of his personal and business finances to an outside trustee to liquidate. The request prompted immediate objections from the election workers and other creditors who accused Giuliani of more delay tactics.

On Wednesday, roughly an hour before a hearing on Giuliani’s request, the former mayor abruptly changed position yet again, asking the judge to dismiss the bankruptcy case altogether.

That hearing later turned contentious as Rachel Strickland, an attorney for Freeman and Moss, accused Giuliani of acting in bad faith and using the same delay tactics he had employed in the defamation case, leading her clients to conclude that Giuliani’s bankruptcy case should be thrown out.

Strickland suggested that if the bankruptcy proceedings were to continue, Giuliani could be accused of “knowingly and fraudulently” hiding details about his finances in violation of bankruptcy law and called on the judge to end the case “unless your honor wants to entertain putting America’s mayor in prison.”

That prompted an angry response from Giuliani, who had called into the hearing and tried to respond to Strickland, prompting Lane to admonish him for speaking out of turn. As Giuliani continued to interrupt, arguing Strickland’s comment was “highly defamatory,” the judge threatened to mute his line.

Lane signaled that he was leaning toward throwing out the case, saying that “past is prologue” and that he believed Giuliani would continue to avoid transparency with the court — which he echoed in his Friday ruling. “The Court sees no evidence that this will change going forward,” the judge wrote.

Giuliani’s attorneys have argued that throwing the case out will allow the former mayor to appeal the defamation judgment — which the bankruptcy judge had prevented him from doing because the litigation was frozen. But under the judge’s order in that case, Giuliani would have to put up a $148 million bond to pursue the appeal and stave off collection efforts by Freeman and Moss.

It was not immediately clear if Giuliani has the means to do that. Friday’s decision adds to the legal fallout faced by Giuliani since the 2020 election, when he joined Trump and other allies in falsely claiming the election was stolen. He is facing criminal charges in Georgia and Arizona over his role in the effort. Giuliani, who has denied any wrongdoing and continues to insist daily that the 2020 election was stolen, has pleaded not guilty in both cases.

Last week, Giuliani was formally disbarred in New York after a court found he repeatedly made false statements about Trump’s election loss. He is facing a similar possibility in Washington, where the D.C. board that oversees law licensing in May recommended his right to practice law be terminated, citing a “frivolous” lawsuit he filed trying to block certification of Pennsylvania’s 2020 election results.

In May, Giuliani was abruptly fired by New York’s WABC Radio after the station’s owner said the former mayor ignored orders to stop talking about the 2020 election, including claims of fraud and “personal lawsuits relating to those allegations” — removing one of his few sources of regular income, according to bankruptcy documents.

Ahead of Lane’s decision, the election workers and committee of creditors filed a proposed motion demanding Giuliani turn over all of the cash in his bank account and sign over control of his New York apartment to a trustee appointed by the group to pay for court and investigative costs related to the bankruptcy proceedings.

In his ruling, Lane declined to immediately take up that issue — calling it “premature.”