EXCLUSIVE: The top Democrat on the House Oversight Committee has been informally meeting with Republicans behind closed doors in an effort to persuade them to abandon the impeachment effort against President Biden, as GOP lawmakers prepare to vote to formalize the inquiry, Fox News Digital has learned.

Committee ranking member Jamie Raskin, D-Md., has been quietly discussing impeachment with House Republicans with whom he has close relationships, multiple sources with direct knowledge of the conversations told Fox News Digital.

Sources said Raskin has been meeting with ‘right-wing to more moderate members’ in an effort to counter GOP arguments, investigative steps, and evidence collected throughout the investigation. 

Those sources told Fox News Digital that some Republicans, in recent days, have been ‘especially receptive to seeing the Administration’s record of cooperation with investigators.’

Meanwhile, Fox News Digital has obtained ‘fact sheets’ House Oversight Democrats plan to share with both Democrats and Republicans to support their efforts to quash the impeachment inquiry.

‘These fact sheets are a hat in hand, fact-based appeal to House Republicans,’ a senior House Democratic aide told Fox News Digital. ‘Republicans may not be getting all of the facts from Mr. Comer, so we are making sure that they have the full picture as they decide whether to endorse this impeachment effort.’

One memo, obtained by Fox News Digital, is focused on obstruction in an effort to defend the Biden administration, as well as banks and private citizens, for providing ‘extraordinary cooperation’ with the committee’s investigation into the Biden family’s business dealings and whether President Biden, himself, was involved.

Another memo defends the firing of Ukrainian prosecutor Viktor Shokin. Joe Biden, as vice president, boasted that he successfully pressured Ukraine to fire Shokin. The then-vice president threatened to withhold $1 billion of critical U.S. aid if Shokin was not fired.

Shokin, at the time, was investigating Burisma Holdings — a Ukrainian natural gas firm where Hunter Biden sat on the board and collected highly-lucrative monthly payments.

But Democrats on the committee echoed past statements from the White House and the president, that Shokin’s firing was actually the ‘culmination of a years-long effort by a bipartisan, international coalition to address and root out corruption in Ukraine.’

Republicans, as part of the impeachment inquiry, have been investigating an FBI-generated FD-1023 form, which alleged a bribery scheme between Joe Biden, Hunter Biden and Burisma CEO Mykola Zlochevsky.

That FD-1023 — a confidential human source (CHS) reporting document — reflects the FBI’s interview with a ‘highly credible’ confidential source who detailed multiple meetings and conversations he or she had with a top executive of Ukrainian natural gas firm Burisma Holdings over the course of several years starting in 2015.

The document includes allegations from Zlochevsky that he was ‘coerced’ into paying Joe Biden and Hunter Biden millions of dollars to get Shokin fired.

That document has been passed to Special Counsel David Weiss, who has been investigating Hunter Biden since 2018. When tapped as special counsel in August, Attorney General Merrick Garland expanded Weiss’s scope to include any other issues that have come up, or may come up, related to that investigation.

But House Oversight Committee Chairman James Comer, R-Ky., told Fox News Digital it is ‘ironic Democrats continue to say there is no evidence and then at every turn seek to prevent the Oversight Committee from gathering evidence.’ 

‘Despite Democrats’ best efforts, the House Oversight Committee has produced evidence revealing Joe Biden knew about, participated in, and benefited from his family cashing in on the Biden last name,’ Comer told Fox News Digital. ‘We will continue to follow the facts and hold this president accountable for his corruption.’

Meanwhile, the Democrats also prepared a memo focused on the funds Joe Biden received from his brother, James Biden, in 2017 and 2018. Both checks, one for $200,000 and one for $40,000, were both labeled as a ‘loan repayment’ in the memo section.

Democrats stress that Joe Biden, as a private citizen, did, in fact, make ‘short-term, interest-free loans to his brother, James, who later repaid him.’ 

But House Oversight Republicans are demanding documentation from the White House to prove that there were, in fact, loans, to be repaid.

Republicans have also pointed to the timing of those payments to Biden—specifically the 2018 $40,000 check—as it came just days after James Biden was wired funds from Hunter Biden, after he received a $5 million wire from a Chinese energy company. Republicans say this is an example of how Joe Biden benefited from his family’s foreign business dealings.

Hunter Biden received a $5 million wire from the Chinese company in August 2018 to his bank account, Hudson West III.

Hunter Biden then transferred $400,000 to his Owasco PC account. Funds were then transferred to a business account belonging to James Biden and later transferred to a personal account belonging to James Biden and Sara Biden.

Comer claims they used those funds to then cut a check to Joe Biden for $40,000. That check was labeled as a ‘loan repayment.’

President Biden has maintained that he was never in business with his son, and never discussed his son’s foreign business dealings. 

Fox News Digital first reported last week metadata revealing that Biden communicated with his son and his son’s business partner Eric Schwerin hundreds of times using an email alias while serving as vice president. Schwerin, though, at the time, served as Biden’s bookkeeper. 

Biden, last week, from the White House, said: ‘I did not, they’re lies. It’s a bunch of lies.’ 

Raskin’s efforts come ahead of a House Rules Committee meeting Tuesday, where lawmakers will consider a resolution to formalize the impeachment inquiry framework against President Biden. 

House Oversight Committee Chairman James Comer, R-Ky.; House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jim Jordan, R-Ohio; and House Ways & Means Committee Chairman Jason Smith, R-Mo., are leading the impeachment inquiry against President Biden. 

The chairmen are investigating any foreign money received by the Biden family, whether President Biden was involved in his family’s foreign business dealings, and steps allegedly taken by the Biden administration to ‘slow, hamper, or otherwise impede the criminal investigation into the President’s son, Hunter Biden, which involves funds received by the Biden family from foreign sources.’

Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y., is criticizing the Biden administration after the U.S. vetoed a United Nations resolution calling for a cease-fire in Gaza.

The progressive ‘Squad’ member wrote, ‘Shameful’ above an X post showing the U.S. as the lone ‘no’ vote against the resolution last week.

‘The Biden [administration] can no longer reconcile their professed concern for Palestinians and human rights while also single-handedly vetoing the UN’s call for ceasefire and sidestepping the entire US Congress to unconditionally back the indiscriminate bombing of Gaza,’ Ocasio-Cortez wrote.

Asked for a response to the congresswoman’s comments, a U.S. official told Fox News Digital on Monday, ‘Despite a rushed process and lack of consultation by the resolution’s authors, the United States engaged in good faith on the resolution. Nearly all of our recommendations were ignored.’

Thirteen countries voted in favor of demanding an immediate cease-fire and a release of all hostages in the conflict between Israel and Hamas on Friday. The U.S. voted against it, and the U.K. abstained.

Robert Wood, the U.S. deputy ambassador to the U.N., maintained the U.S. wanted to see peace between Israelis and Palestinians but was critical of how the resolution would go about it.

‘It would simply leave Hamas in place, able to regroup and repeat what it did on Oct. 7. Colleagues, a senior Hamas official recently stated the group intends to repeat the vile acts of Oct. 7, quote, again and again and again, unquote. And yet this resolution essentially says Israel should just tolerate this, that it should allow this terror to go unchecked,’ Wood said on Friday. ‘Although the United States strongly supports a durable peace in which both Israelis and Palestinians can live in peace and security, we do not support this resolution’s call for an unsustainable cease-fire that will only plant the seeds for the next war.’

Hamas terrorists invaded southern Israel on Oct. 7, killing more than 1,200 people – mainly innocent civilians. 

Israel has responded with force, bombarding Gaza with rocket fire and sending in ground troops. The Hamas-run Gaza Health Ministry has said about 18,000 Palestinians have been killed.

Israel’s retaliatory efforts have been a wedge between progressive U.S. Democrats and more traditional liberals who view the relationship between Tel Aviv and Washington as critical. 

Rep. Rashida Tlaib, D-Mich., an ally of Ocasio-Cortez, was censured along bipartisan lines last month for her anti-Israel comments.

More GOP senators are rallying behind former President Trump for the 2024 general election, boosting his momentum in the Republican Party.

Sen. Kevin Cramer, R-N.D., announced last week on X he is endorsing Trump in the GOP primary. 

‘I am honored to stand with Donald J. Trump as he embarks on a mission to restore peace, prosperity and freedom in our great nation,’ Cramer wrote. ‘Lets consolidate Republican support around the leader of our GOP and ensure a Republican victory in 2024. Work with him to Make America Great Again!’

His endorsement came as North Dakota Gov. Doug Burgum backed out of the race last Monday. Cramer previously supported Burgum.

Sen. John Hoeven, R-N.D., also endorsed Trump after Burgum dropped out. 

‘President Trump is strong on the issues that are important for North Dakota. That includes making America energy dominant, reducing the regulatory burden, securing our border, growing our economy and strong support for our military,’ Hoeven wrote on Facebook last week. 

Hoeven added he had the opportunity to work with the former president ‘to support our farmers’ and that he ‘understands how vital strong farm policy is to our state and our nation.’

Republican Alabama Sen. Katie Britt also endorsed Trump right before the GOP debate Wednesday night with an op-ed in the local news outlet Yellowhammer.

‘One candidate has already proven he’s more than up for the job – because he’s done the job successfully. There is one candidate I know will secure the border – because he’s done it. There is one candidate I know will achieve peace through strength – because he’s done it,’ she wrote. ‘And that’s why President Donald Trump has my endorsement to be our 47th President.’

Britt went on to say that ‘results matter’ and that the former president’s track record ‘are clear for all to see.’ 

‘These past three years have felt like an eternity, but I’m sure you recall how much better off we were under the Trump Administration,’ she wrote.

Trump, the first major GOP leader to announce his candidacy, has now secured backing from every GOP member in Alabama’s congressional delegation.

The endorsements come as there are only a few GOP candidates left in the running – Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis, former South Carolina Gov. Nikki Haley, businessman Vivek Ramaswamy, former New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie and Trump.

Trump leads the GOP nomination race with the backing of a record 62% of Republican primary voters in a Fox News survey released last month.

So far, 16 senators and more than 80 House members have announced their support for Trump in 2024. Seven governors also support his bid for the presidency. 

Sen. JD Vance, R-Ohio, said on Sunday that the United States needs to accept that Ukraine must ‘cede some territory’ to Russia and that American leadership must ensure the U.S. is ‘not writing more blank checks’ to fund Kyiv’s forces ahead of Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy’s visit to Washington, D.C., this week. 

‘We can’t make strategic decisions based on stark morality tales. We have to figure out what is in America’s best interest,’ Vance said Sunday during an appearance on CNN’s ‘State of the Union.’ ‘We have a food crisis that’s getting worse because of the prolonged war in Eastern Europe. We have an energy crisis that’s threatening to swamp multiple allied governments in Western Europe. What’s in America’s best interest is to accept Ukraine is going to have to cede some territory to the Russians, and we need to bring this war to a close. When I think about the great human tragedy here, hundreds of thousands of eastern Europeans, innocent, have been killed in this conflict. The thing that’s in our interest and in theirs is to stop the killing.’ 

‘On the Ukraine question in particular, everybody knows everybody with a brain in their head … knows that this was always going to end in negotiation,’ Vance added. ‘The idea that Ukraine was going to throw Russia back to the 1991 borders was preposterous. Nobody actually believed it. So what we’re saying to the president and really to the entire world is you need to articulate what the ambition is. What is $61 billion going to accomplish? That $100 billion hasn’t reached.’ 

‘Ukraine is functionally destroyed as a country. The average age of a soldier in the Ukrainian army right now is 43. That’s tragic. That’s older than me. I’m 39,’ Vance told host Jake Tapper, who later disagreed with the ‘age graphic’ but told viewers he himself is 54 years old. ‘If this thing goes on a little bit longer, the average age of a Ukrainian soldier is going to be older than you,’ Vance continued. ‘And then a year later, could be Wolf Blitzer. That is a tragedy. What does it look like?’ 

Regarding America’s role in the conflict, Vance said, ‘We are getting to a place where we’re going to be functionally on the hook to pay for Ukrainian pensioners to rebuild the entire country. We need to bring the killing to a stop. And that’s what American leadership should be doing, not writing more blank checks to the war.’ 

Zelenskyy will meet with President Biden at the White House on Tuesday as the administration steps up the pressure on Congress to provide billions more in aid to Kyiv in its war with Russia. The visit is intended ‘to underscore the United States’ unshakeable commitment to supporting the people of Ukraine as they defend themselves against Russia’s brutal invasion,’ the White House said in a statement Sunday. ‘As Russia ramps up its missile and drone strikes against Ukraine, the leaders will discuss Ukraine’s urgent needs and the vital importance of the United States’ continued support at this critical moment.’

Zelenskyy’s office confirmed that he had accepted Biden’s invitation. He also has been asked to speak to a meeting of all senators.

Biden has asked Congress for a $110 billion package for wartime funding for Ukraine ($61.4 billion) and Israel, along with other national security priorities, but the request is caught up in a debate over U.S. immigration policy and border security. Congress already has allocated $111 billion to assist Ukraine, and Biden’s budget director, Shalanda Young, said in a letter this past week to House and Senate leaders that the U.S. will run out of funding to send weapons and assistance to Ukraine by the end of the year, which would ‘kneecap’ Ukraine on the battlefield.

‘It’s time to cut a deal that both sides can agree to,’ Young said Sunday.

The stakes are especially high for Ukraine, Secretary of State Antony Blinken said during two TV interviews Sunday, given that ‘we are running out of funding’ for the Ukrainians. ‘This is a time to really step up because if we don’t, we know what happens. Putin will be able to move forward with impunity and we know he won’t stop in Ukraine.’

The Associated Press contributed to this report.

Attorneys for Hunter Biden filed a motion Monday afternoon in federal court in Delaware to dismiss the indictment against him over gun charges, saying it ‘violates’ the collapsed plea agreement, and maintain it is ‘still in effect’ between the president’s son and federal prosecutors. 

Special Counsel David Weiss charged Hunter Biden with making a false statement in the purchase of a firearm; making a false statement related to information required to be kept by a federal firearms licensed dealer; and one count of possession of a firearm by a person who is an unlawful user of or addicted to a controlled substance. 

The president’s son pleaded not guilty to all counts in October. At the time, his attorney Abbe Lowell hinted that the defense planned to file a motion to dismiss due to the diversion agreement on the gun charges, which he said he believed was still in effect.

The diversion agreement was included as part of the original plea deal that collapsed in July. Biden was set to plead guilty to two misdemeanor tax counts of willful failure to pay federal income tax, which would allow him to avoid jail time on a felony gun charge. That deal fell apart during his last court appearance. The president’s son, in July, was then forced to plead not guilty to two misdemeanor tax charges and one felony gun charge when the deal collapsed in court.

‘The Indictment against Mr. Biden must be dismissed because it violates a Diversion Agreement that is in effect between Mr. Biden and the prosecution,’ Lowell argued in the filing. ‘In exchange for Mr. Biden giving up various rights—including his Fifth Amendment right to remain silent by agreeing to the Statement of Facts drafted by the prosecution and numerous restrictions on his liberty—the prosecution agreed to provide him immunity for any offense concerning his purchase of a firearm (among other offenses).’ 

Citing the initial agreement, which Republicans have billed as a ‘sweetheart plea deal,’ Lowell said prosecutors, in July, said they could not bring firearms charges ‘based on the firearm identified in the factual statement to the Diversion Agreement.’ 

‘Nevertheless, the prosecution did just that, by subsequently bringing this Indictment charging Mr. Biden with three felony firearm offenses, which all relate to the firearm identified in the Diversion Agreement’s factual statement,’ Lowell continued Monday. ‘Because Mr. Biden gave up valuable rights as part of this contract, in exchange for the prosecution’s promise not to prosecute him, such promise must be fulfilled.’

‘Mr. Biden, one party, struck a deal with the prosecution, the other party, through the Diversion Agreement,’ the filing continues. ‘As part of that Agreement, he sacrificed valuable rights in exchange for the prosecution’s agreement not to prosecute the very sort of Indictment that it has brought here.’ 

Lowell said that the ‘prosecution’s desire to take political cover from the criticism leveled against it does not provide a legal basis for them to renege on the Diversion Agreement it explained to the Court it had made.’

‘The Court should require the prosecution to honor its agreement and dismiss the Indictment,’ Lowell stated. 

Hunter Biden pleaded not guilty to the charges during a court appearance in October. With all counts combined, the total maximum prison time for the charges could be up to 25 years. Each count carries a maximum fine of $250,000, and three years of supervised release. 

Magistrate Judge Christopher Burke, who presided over the hearing,  laid out the conditions for Hunter Biden’s release, which required the president’s son to seek employment and communicate all international travel plans. Biden also is prohibited from possessing a firearm and using alcohol and drugs, and he is required to get drug tested randomly and participate in a substance abuse counseling program. 

Fox News first reported in 2021 that police had responded to an incident in 2018, when a gun owned by Hunter was thrown into a trash can outside a market in Delaware.

A source with knowledge of the Oct. 23, 2018, police report told Fox News that it indicated that Hallie Biden, who is the widow of President Biden’s late son, Beau, and who was in a relationship with Hunter at the time, threw a gun owned by Hunter in a dumpster behind a market near a school.

A firearm transaction report reviewed by Fox News indicated that Hunter purchased a gun earlier that month.

On the firearm transaction report, Hunter answered in the negative when asked if he was ‘an unlawful user of, or addicted to, marijuana or any depressant, stimulant, narcotic drug, or any other controlled substance.’

Hunter was discharged from the Navy in 2014 after testing positive for cocaine.

The federal gun charges were the first charges Weiss brought against Hunter after being granted special counsel status by Attorney General Merrick Garland in August. 

But the move by Biden’s defense on Monday is separate from the charges the president’s son faces in California, also stemming from Weiss’ investigation. 

Weiss charged Biden late Thursday, alleging a ‘four-year scheme’ when the president’s son did not pay his federal income taxes from January 2017 to October 2020 while also filing false tax reports. Weiss filed the charges in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California. 

The charges break down to three felonies and six misdemeanors concerning $1.4 million in owed taxes that were since paid.

This is a developing story. Please check back for updates. 

The Senate is likely to leave town for the holidays without passing the Biden administration’s $106 billion national supplemental security package, three sources familiar with the talks told Fox News Digital on Monday. 

The package, which Biden requested from Congress in October, carves out roughly $60 billion for Ukraine, $14 billion for Israel and $14 billion for faster asylum processing at the border and more agents. The administration urged Congress to pass the supplemental by the end of the year. 

However, Senate Republicans have been trying to strike a deal for weeks that would include stricter border security policies — such as higher asylum standards and immediate screenings for migrants — in the package. Democrats disagree and have argued the bill should not include policy changes. 

GOP lawmakers in the upper chamber also want aid for Ukraine and Israel split up, signaling a shift in support for Ukraine’s defense against Russia since the Eastern European nation was first invaded in February 2022. Republicans have said Ukraine aid is contingent upon tougher border policies. 

‘We are nowhere close to getting that passed,’ one Senate aide said of the supplemental. 

Another aide said a deal on border security is unlikely to be reached this week, but if there is one, ‘it will be very small.’ 

Another source close to the talks said Sen. Majority Leader Mitch McConnell’s office said he doesn’t think a deal will be reached this week, either. 

‘The Republicans are demanding a good border bill, and it doesn’t look like they’re gonna get it,’ the source said. 

Last week, before Republicans blocked the supplemental bill on the floor, Sen. James Lankford, R-Okla., — one of the lead negotiators on the border talks — told Fox News Digital, ‘We are not moving on a supplemental until we have a way to be able to actually resolve our border security issues.’ 

‘We’re not having to solve everything on every issue, but we do have to solve the border issues to make sure that we can stop this out of control flow,’ he said. 

Votes came 49-51, falling short of the Senate’s 60-vote threshold for passing. The failure to pass came hours after President Biden said it was ‘stunning’ that Congress has not yet approved tens of billions in military and economic assistance for Ukraine. 

Biden has signaled his willingness to make some compromises at the border, but has not said specifically which policies he would embrace. He has accused Republicans of wanting a political issue more than bipartisan compromise.

‘Republicans think they get everything they want without any bipartisan compromise,’ Biden said. ‘Now they’re willing to literally kneecap Ukraine on the battlefield and damage our national security in the process.’

Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., and House Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., have both previously signaled the GOP will pass more Ukraine funding if a deal is struck for tighter immigration laws.  

On Tuesday, Ukraine President Vladomir Zelenskyy will make a final plea in a Senate meeting at 9 a.m. ET to pass additional funding. 

The Senate’s last full day is expected to be Thursday, and they will not return until Jan. 9.

The Associated Press contributed to this report. 

The Supreme Court has indicated it will expedite consideration of a petition by special counsel Jack Smith on whether former President Donald Trump can be prosecuted on charges he plotted to overturn the 2020 election results.

Smith made his request for the court to act with unusual speed to prevent any delays that could push back the trial until after next year’s presidential election.

Trump’s trial in the election interference case is set to begin in March. 

The Court has asked Trump’s lawyers to respond to the special counsel’s motion by next Wednesday, December 20 – two days later than Smith had requested. 

The Court’s next scheduled conference day for consideration of such matters is Jan. 5, 2024. The court’s brief order did not signal what it ultimately would do.

A federal judge ruled the case could go forward, but Trump said he would ask the federal appeals court in Washington to reverse that outcome. Smith is attempting to bypass the appeals court – the usual next step in the process – and have the Supreme Court take up the matter directly.

‘This case presents a fundamental question at the heart of our democracy: whether a former President is absolutely immune from federal prosecution for crimes committed while in office or is constitutionally protected from federal prosecution when he has been impeached but not convicted before the criminal proceedings begin,’ prosecutors wrote.

Trump’s presidential campaign criticized Smith for trying to go around the appeals court. 

‘There is absolutely no reason to rush this sham to trial except to injure President Trump and tens of millions of his supporters. President Trump will continue to fight for Justice and oppose these authoritarian tactics,’ the campaign said in a statement.

The court is next scheduled to meet privately on Jan. 5, 2024. It’s unclear whether the justices would convene sooner to take up Smith’s request.

At issue is a Dec. 1 ruling from U.S. District Judge Tanya Chutkan that rejected arguments by Trump’s lawyers that he was immune from federal prosecution. In her order, Chutkan wrote that the office of the president ‘does not confer a lifelong ‘get-out-of-jail-free’ pass.’

‘Former Presidents enjoy no special conditions on their federal criminal liability,’ Chutkan wrote. ‘Defendant may be subject to federal investigation, indictment, prosecution, conviction, and punishment for any criminal acts undertaken while in office.’

If the justices get involved, they would have an opportunity to rule for the first time on whether ex-presidents enjoy immunity from prosecution. Justice Department policy prohibits the indictment of a sitting president. 

Trump lawyers, meanwhile, have said he cannot be charged for actions that fell within his official duties as president — a claim that prosecutors have vigorously rejected.

Smith’s team says there would not be an opportunity to consider and resolve the question in the current term if the court did not expedite the matter. 

‘The United States recognizes that this is an extraordinary request. This is an extraordinary case,’ prosecutors wrote. ‘The Court should grant certiorari and set a briefing schedule that would permit this case to be argued and resolved as promptly as possible.’

Prosecutors are also asking the court to take up Trump’s claim, also already rejected by Chutkan, that he cannot be prosecuted in court for conduct for which he was already impeached — and acquitted — before Congress. 

Trump faces charges accusing him of working to overturn the results of the 2020 election he lost to Democrat Joe Biden before the violent riot by his supporters at the U.S. Capitol. He has denied any wrongdoing.

If the justices decline to step in at this point, Trump’s appeal would continue at the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit. Smith has asked for quick review there, too but said even a rapid appellate decision might not get to the Supreme Court in time for review and final word before the court’s traditional summer break.

The Associated Press contributed to this report.

A group of bipartisan lawmakers on Capitol Hill are trying to end a tariff on American liquor exports to Europe that could bump up to a whopping 50% on Jan. 1. 

In 2018, President Donald Trump set heavy tariffs on most European steel and aluminum imports to the U.S,, including from allies in the European Union, in an effort to boost American manufacturing.

The EU, infuriated by the decision, set retaliatory tariffs on American products, including whiskey and spirits. There was a mutual agreement struck between the Biden administration and the EU to temporarily suspend the burdensome tariffs. But the deadline on that suspension is Jan. 1, 2024. Unless an agreement is reached before the New Year, the tariff will be reimposed and doubled to 50%.

‘Spirits have had a significant cultural impact in our country, and currently have a profound impact on the U.S. economy. In 2022 alone, U.S. distilled spirit exports reached $2.06 billion. But the impact of the retaliatory tariffs was devastating,’ a group of bipartisan senators wrote to the Biden administration.

‘There are mutual benefits in finding a path forward, and our belief is that spirits and wines are a point where there can be consensus to limit the damage for all parties,’ they said. 

In the letter, addressed to U.S. Trade Representative Katherine Tai, and led by Sens. Tim Kaine, D-Va., and Mark Warner, D-Va., along with Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., and a dozen others, the lawmakers contend that for the American whiskey industry, exports decreased from $702 million to $440 million, a loss of 20%, between 2018 and 2021. 

In 2022, American spirits exports rebounded over 2017 pre-tariff levels – the last full year before retaliatory tariffs – due in large part to the suspension of tariffs, the lawmakers claim. 

For many in the hospitality industry and others such as retailers, grocers, importers and distributors, many of which are small, locally-owned businesses, the impact was severe, compounded by the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, they argue.

A report in the Wall Street Journal described the ‘bar fight over whiskey’ as just a sample of what harm the retaliatory tariffs have caused other homegrown small businesses. 

EU tariffs retaliating against the U.S. also struck Harley-Davidson motorcycles, orange juice and Levi’s jeans. Like whiskey, those products remain on the EU’s list of suspended tariffs, the WSJ reported. 

President Biden and the EU met in October in hopes of reaching a new agreement over the tariffs, but to no avail. 

On Thursday, the biggest national trade association, Distilled Spirits Council of the United States, along with over 100 trade organizations representing a variety of interests, signed a statement saying, ‘the prospect of the return and increase of retaliatory tariffs in the steel and aluminum dispute, barely a month away, is causing unbearable uncertainty and instability for unrelated sectors.’

The groups say the prospect of the reimposition of duties on their products, ingredients and raw materials caught up in the steel and aluminum dispute would amount to more than $1.43 billion. 

Brooke Glover, owner of Swilled Dog distillery in West Virginia, told the Wall Street Journal that she’s been wanting to ship her award-winning whiskey to her fans across the pond, but with the looming tax increase over a dispute unrelated to her industry, she can’t yet make those plans. 

‘We’re just collateral damage,’ Glover told the outlet.