Newsom Signs Climate Deal With Nigeria Despite the Christian Genocide
Yes, let’s be friendly with the epicenter of Christian persecution in Africa. You’re such a winner, Newsom.
Leslie wrote about the UN Climate Change Conference in Brazil, describing it as a major flop.
Our California correspondent also brought up her awful Gov. Gavin Newsom, who has used it as a way to bash President Donald Trump and brag about the state’s “clean” energy.
Well, I wanted to bring attention to a deal Newsom signed at the conference.
Newsom boasted about a “clean” energy deal he inked with Nigeria, but omitted a fact about the African country.
Hey, Gavin! Did you ask about the Christian genocide in Nigeria? https://t.co/FNLZZmMOWU
— Mary 🦃 Thankful Ginger 🥧 (@mchastain81) November 12, 2025
Yes, Nigeria is in the midst of a multi-year Christian genocide.
Let’s go back to April 2014.
Boko Haram has been terrorizing Nigeria since 2002, but became international news in 2014 when the terrorists kidnapped 276 schoolgirls.
It launched the #BringBackOurGirls movement, which did absolutely nothing.
Over 80 girls are still missing.
The suffering of Nigerian Christians is horrific, especially Leah Sharibu's family. They have endured a years-long nightmare.
Important piece today from Andrea Piciotti-Bayer @BayerPicciotti in CP Opinion.https://t.co/NBB1iQKj9g
— Brandon M Showalter (@BrandonMShow) November 12, 2025
But Boko Haram has continued to slaughter Christians across Nigeria.
According to Open Doors, Nigeria is ranked seventh when it comes to religious persecution.
The country is home to over 106 million Christians, making up 46.5% of the population.
But it’s not just murder. Boko Haram and other terrorists abduct priests, sell women into sex slavery, burn down villages, etc:
According to a report issued in August by the International Society for Civil Liberties and the Rule of Law (Intersociety), an African nongovernmental group that documents human rights violations, in the first seven months of this year alone, more than 7,000 Christians were killed in Nigeria.
Christians of various denominations and moderate Muslims regularly die at the hands of Boko Haram, Fulani militants and other violent actors.
Numbers vary and are difficult to verify, but between 2009 and 2023 in Nigeria, Intersociety reports at least 52,000 Christians killed, 18,500 abducted and unlikely to have survived, and more than 20,000 churches and Christian schools attacked.
Most of the attacks happen in northern Nigeria:
Boko Haram and Islamic State West Africa Province (ISWAP) have explicitly and repeatedly declared Christians as targets. And many victims have told us that when Fulani militants attack, they don’t just shout “Allahu Akbar” (“God is most great”)—they also yell, “We will destroy all Christians.”
According to the Observatory for Religious Freedom in Africa, who has painstakingly collected data on civilian violence and deaths in the region, the trends are clear: More Christians are killed by the extremists than Muslims—given the relative population size of Muslims and Christians in northern states. In fact, if you are a Christian, you are 6.5 times more likely to be killed than a Muslim and 5.1 times more likely to be abducted. This does not make the suffering of a Muslim less tragic; it just makes it less likely.
President Donald Trump already told the Pentagon to prepare for any action if Nigeria doesn’t end the persecution.
Unfortunately, the violence isn’t limited to Nigeria. We’ve documented other attacks, especially in Sudan and the Democratic Republic of the Congo.
Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.
Comments
Wow what a tone deaf loser; didn’t he get the memeo tha climate change is not cool with the hipsters anymore? So it’s okay to have epople being murdered, raped, displaced, starved etc., as long as their average yearly temperature stays below a certrain level and their carbon footprint is immaculate? I’m thinking “clean energy” is not really the priority here.
It seems that Newsome no longer believes he has to abide by the Constitution either. Only the president, with the approval of 2/3 of the Senate has the right to establish international treaties. I hope the DOJ is paying attention.
I wish the article had given a LITTLE mention about what sort of a “green climate deal” a US governor “signed” with a foreign nation without falling afoul of Article I, Section 10.
Newsom has stated that California is a “nation-state” and not just a state. California prefers a looser confederation with the United States … giving the US guidance. Don’t ask what California would be like without single party Democrat control.
Yes, I was hearing the same insurrectional twaddle from their state park docents 25 years ago, I’m game to finalize it. If there were any way to perforate the border and set the whole state adrift, I’d provide the launching champagne bottle.
Let Scott Adams and Victor Davis Hanson get out first.
They have had the money and time to do that
I know Scott is ill, speaking a decade ago
CA is going to build a high speed rail from Nigeria’s capital to Sacramento.
That’s a good question, but note Virginia v Tennessee, in which the Supreme Court found that the Compact clause applies only to compacts that are in some way Congress’s business, i.e. ones that increase the states’ power at the expense of federal power. Agreements that don’t affect the USA or alter the balance of power between the USA and the states, don’t need Congress’s permission. So it’s possible that this deal with Nigeria is not covered by the clause.
When exactly was Nigeria admitted to the Union? You are cited a controversy between States.
Foreign policy is the province of the Executive Branch and to some extent Congress; not a State Governor. Climate Change is a ersatz substitute for foreign policy.
It’s the exact same clause. “No state shall, without the consent of congress […] enter into any agreement or compact with another state or with a foreign power.” You can’t put any daylight between the two.
The foreign policy of the United States is mostly in the president’s hands. States are entitled to their own foreign policies, just as they’re entitled to their own policies on everything else, but if they want to make agreements with other states or with foreign governments, that increase the states’ power at the expense of the federal government’s power, then they need congress’s permission.
Christians are not a core constituency of Newsom.
Bee: “‘Prayer Doesn’t Work,” Claims Liberal Who Neither Prays Nor Works”
Here is the agreement:
https://www.gov.ca.gov/wp-content/uploads/2025/11/MOU-Nigeria-California_FINAL_11.10.2025.pdf
Looks like Nigeria gets 100% of the cooperation, and ICE gets 0%.
“This MOU is a voluntary initiative. It does not create any legally binding rights or obligations and creates no legally cognizable or enforceable rights or remedies, legal or equitable, in any forum whatsoever. In addition, the commitments in this MOU are not conditioned upon reciprocal actions by other Participants; each Participant retains full discretion over implementation of its commitments in light of the Participant’s individual circumstances, laws, and policies; and each Participant is free to terminate the MOU.”
Looks like it’s a whole lot of nothing, and therefore probably doesn’t impact the USA in any way and thus doesn’t need Congress’s permission.
It also does actually nothing, except virtue signal. About right for Newsom and greenies.
He’s probably making a trade deal for Nyjer seed.
One of the reasons he signed the deal is BECAUSE of the genocide. It represents what he wants to do in this country.
Trump: Nigeria is very bad. Nigeria is permitting the murder of Christians. We’ll deal harshly with them if Nigeria doesn’t help Christians.
Newsom: Hi, Nigeria. Come on to my house and color in my color book. Stay away from Donald. He’s a mean ol’ poopyhead. Come on. Let’s play!
Newsome is such child. Good grief.
Never mind going to war in Nigeria. Can the US invade CA and bring that insurrectionist state to heel? While they’re at it can they execute Newsome and the traitorous democrats in the state legislature, cities, and towns? Asking all this for a friend.
A Minescape friend.
Is he really that square and boxy?
But it’s not just murder. Boko Haram and other terrorists abduct priests, sell women into sex slavery, burn down villages, etc:
California knows all about burning cities. It’s changing laws to make sex trafficking harder to catch and prosecute. Hmm…
Murdering Christians was the cherry on top for Guvna Hair Gel.
Can’t hate the fool enough
He ought to be in media.
A climate deal with Nigeria? Was the $100 million lottery prize involved?
It is often said that being good looking is an asset in politics, but that observation needs some refinement. One must be good looking in a repulsively sleazy way in order to attract the female voter. Being handsome and classy is the kiss of death. Look at Mitt Romney.
The hysterical, addlepated slattern thirsts for a man who might just get drunk enough to give her a quick roll in a cheap motel.
“addlepated slattern”
Impressive.
Romney had all the sex appeal of a Ken doll. LOL
Aside from the whole Christian issue isn’t it kind of illegal for anyone outside of the executive branch of the government, specifically the state department or the president to do foreign policy or foreign relations? Certainly the president for his secretary of state would be the person to enter into an agreement and possibly even submit a treaty for ratification.
See my earlier comment citing Virginia v Tennessee, and the paragraph I quoted from this “memorandum of understanding”. It seems to me that since this agreement doesn’t create any obligations on anyone, and only promises that CA will do things that CA wants to do, for as long as it wants to do them, it doesn’t affect the USA in any way, and therefore doesn’t need Congress’s permission.
I do think we need to make a bigger stink about these “agreements”, though. Right along those lines – in order for them to be constitutional they need to be pointless gesturing; if they go beyond pointless gesturing they need to be slammed, hard.
It’s one of those places where I think Congress and the Presidency have not zealously guarded their powers. (And, that guarding doesn’t have to be in court; using the bully pulpit as I mentioned would be great.)
They don’t have to be pointless gesturing. Virginia v Tennessee was about substantive agreements between states, that simply have no impact on the USA and are therefore none of Congress’s business. For instance suppose Newsom wanted to open a California tourism office in New York, and for that purpose rented premises from the NY state government and signed a lease for it. That would be an interstate compact, but according to SCOTUS it wouldn’t need Congress’s permission.
how could it NOT AFFECT the USA in any way!!??
CA gets the USA taxpayers money and that money provides trips overseas etc
meals at the french laundrymat etc
CA does not get lumps of US taxpayer money. The federal government funds specific things that it wants CA to do. These proposed junkets to Nigeria are not among them, and will not be receiving any federal funds. If CA wants to spend its own taxpayers’ money sending bureaucrats on a paid holiday to Nigeria, that’s none of the USA’s business.
What a fkn snake …
2002? Maybe just Boko Haram, hen.
I had dear phrends who went to Nigeria as medical missionaries in abou 1978. They served there over 20 years and saw many instances o persecution against those who believe in Jesus. Genocidal attacks were common, targetting tribal groups who were Christians.
Perhaps Boko Haram just came on the scene as a more visible entity around 2002. But it had been ongoing over decades when they got there.
They also had to take great care in wh tbey printed in their monthly newsletters. We who knew them got the whole story when they were back on a rest session and visiting.
again
why would a lefty have a problem with the ethnic cleansing of those they too hate!?
so gavin goes along with them
protecting females is not his thing
attacking them is
alos ..nigeria has laws against same sex marriage
guess that wont bother his royal hair gel
Newsom as a state Governor should not be doing any foreign activities with other countries as that is a sole function of the Federal Government. Newsom and others in the state, such as Los Angeles Mayor Bass, are wasting time and tax money when they conduct business with foreign countries. The state of California has heavy debt that it cannot tax enough people and business to clear as they are leaving in droves.
What activities a state governor chooses to engage in with foreign governments is entirely a matter for that state’s voters. If they’re happy with what he’s doing, or happy enough not to throw him out, then it’s nobody else’s business — unless it affects the USA by enhancing the state’s power at the expense of the USA’s power, in which case any substantive agreement with another state, or with a foreign government, needs Congress’s permission.