Archive link

Donald Trump on Monday, January 19 threatened 200% tariffs on French wine and champagne over France’s intentions to decline the US leader’s invitation to join his “board of peace.” The board was originally conceived to oversee the rebuilding of war-torn Gaza, but the charter does not appear to limit its role to the occupied Palestinian territory.

“I’ll put a 200% tariff on his wines and champagnes. And he’ll join. But he doesn’t have to join,” Trump said, referring to French President Emmanuel Macron. A source close to Macron told AFP on Monday that France “does not intend to answer favorably” to the invitation.

The board’s charter “goes beyond the sole framework of Gaza,” the source close to the French president said.

  • ramble81@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    7 days ago

    That’s always something that I’ve found interesting. If it looks like a duck, walks like a duck, and quacks like a duck, but it’s one perceived imaginary line over from where other ducks are…. It can’t be called a duck?

    • criticon@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      7 days ago

      Oh it can be called a duck, but not a “Mallard”, “wood duck” or something specific like that unless it is from that species

      All tequilas are agave distillates, but not all agave distillates are tequilas.

      Tequila is an agave distillate, but unless it is from the specific region using an specific type of agave it can’t be called tequila

      • ramble81@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        7 days ago

        I’m thinking more of you’re using the exact same berry, use the same exact processs, but you just happened to be less than 60 miles north in Belgium, an imaginary line says you can’t call it Champaign. It’s just weird.

      • ramble81@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        7 days ago

        That’s actually a route I never thought of. We’ve closely conflated the name with the type that I don’t think about it that way. So really rather than a specific section for “champagne”, it should actually be a section for “sparkling wines” of which champagne would be in there.

        Though that being said, usually a trademark is given to a single company. In this case it’s multiple companies using it, which is where it gets rocky. (Bourbon is another one too)