Election Limbo Part II, Day 11: Know your Roll/Role

It is important to know your roll* as a council member.

Ever since the Cherokee Nation won its lawsuit against the freedmen (last week), there has been some discussion about the OTHER lawsuit with the freedmen, known by some as the Nash case.  Nash is the name of the one of the freedmen who sued the Cherokee Nation in Tribal court (and lost) over citizenship.  The Cherokee Nation sued him (and a bunch of others) back in federal court.

Baker and his lawyer, Chuck Hoskin Jr., are referring to this when they said that Smith “secretly cut a deal secretly cutting a deal with Congressmen in DC to allow the Freedmen to remain on the roles (sic)* as long as he was chief in exchange for HUD money.  Smith illegally cut this deal with a group of Congressmen without the knowledge or consent of the elected Cherokee Council.”

He also said that the  "Tulsa World further verified that Smith waived the Tribes (sic) sovereignty and we demand the details. The tribe's suit, which waived the Cherokee Nation's sovereign immunity only, in that case, was originally filed in Tulsa,’ the Tulsa World wrote.”

They asked Attorney General Diane “Hammonds”   to investigate this “secret deal.”

Well she did, and she released the results of her investigation today.  The Smith campaign liked it so much, they posted it online.

 

It’s just a couple of pages long, and it’s pretty straight forward.  She notes that the request for the investigation was filed 3 days before the election and immediately publicized by Baker’s campaign.  She also points out that Baker was well informed about the Nash case, despite his claims otherwise.

We did a little research of our own, based on Hammon’s analysis, and the more we looked the more Cherokee Truth came out. Here’s what we discovered:

On February 3, 2009, the Cherokee Nation issued a news release, which is still publicly available on the Cherokee Nation’s web site for all to see. It begins:

“TULSA, Okla.—The Cherokee Nation filed today a lawsuit asking a federal court in Oklahoma to resolve the long-standing dispute of whether non-Indian Freedmen descendants have a federal right to citizenship in the Cherokee Nation.  The Cherokee Nation is asking the court to confirm that Congress unilaterally modified the Treaty of 1866, and, as a result, the non-Indian descendants of those Freedmen have no federal rights to citizenship in the Cherokee Nation.”

It later has a quote from Smith:

“Last year, I assured members of Congress, including Barney Frank (D-MA), that if they would let the federal courts decide we would push to have the controversy heard on the merits,” Smith said.  “This filing today is the Cherokee Nation keeping its word, and letting the federal courts have a clear path to reaching a decision on the merits without compromising the Nation’s sovereign immunity, and without the risk of setting procedural precedents that may affect other tribes.  Members of Congress have said they will respect a federal court decision on this issue, and this is the quickest way to an impartial, apolitical, judicial solution."

Nothing secret going on here: There was and is a news release about it on the Cherokee Nation’s web

site.

There are also later media references to the case, including an Associated Press story. 

Just two days after the case was filed, Hammons told a council committee meeting about it (see the rules committee meeting minutes from February 5, 2009).  Smith talked to the full tribal council about it at the February Council meeting (see the council meeting minutes from February 17, 2009).  The full council voted on, and unanimously approved of the lawsuit in the March council meeting (see minutes of the March 16, 2009 council meeting).  

Unanimously, of course, means everyone on the council agreed.  Bill John Baker and Chuck Hoskin Jr. were both on the council during these meetings, and both men were in attendance.  Hammons was kind enough to pass along a PDF showing Baker and Hoskin had indeed approved it.

So not only is the "deal" not secret, Baker and the full tribal council were explicitly informed about the case--so much so that they agreed it was a good idea for it to move forward!

So, that said, let’s walk back through Baker’s quotes again after having done some cursory research that any Cherokee citizen could do for themselves.

Baker claims: “Smith illegally cut this deal with a group of Congressmen without the knowledge or consent of the elected Cherokee Council.”  WRONG. Council minutes referenced above show that the council, and any Cherokee who checked the Cherokee Nation web site, were proactively informed about the lawsuit.

Baker claims: “Tulsa World further verified that Smith waived the Tribes (sic) sovereignty and we demand the details.”  WRONG AGAIN.  And while we’re handing out demands, how about this: the Cherokee people demand you pay attention in the council meetings we pay you to attend!  The details you need are in the minutes from the meeting in 2009 when you voted IN FAVOR of the lawsuit you are now criticizing.

Smith had some choice words on the subject and he, rightfully, lets Baker have it with both barrels.  You can visit his facebook page if you want to find out more.  

Baker and Hoskin may have presented more evidence to Hammons, but the evidence that any Cherokee can find is clear:  the discussion of the Nash case was made in a very public way and approved by the very people who now claim not to know anything about it.  It doesn’t seem like they take their rolls** as council members very seriously if they don’t even know what they voted on.

  

*Probably a typo.  He probably meant tribal rolls, the list of Cherokee Nation citizens, not ‘tribal roles’

** We meant to use the wrong word here.  Because it is funny.  We know our role, as citizens on the Cherokee Nation’s rolls.  See?  It isn’t that hard really. But don't get us started on the difference between polls and poles.

3 Days Until the Election: Mr. Crittenden Goes to Washington

It’s official:  Freedmen can vote in our new election, thanks to an agreement approved Wednesday by APCSJC, the Freedmen and the BIA.  Significant in the deal is that the election ain’t over on Saturday:  Freedmen get extra time to get their absentee ballots in (which makes sense since they didn’t get them as early) and they also get two extra days to go vote in-person, besides election day and the other early voting available to the rest of Cherokee citizens.  

Oh, did we mention the best part?  The federal court ruling seemingly trumps our Supreme Court by telling them that Cherokee law doesn’t count and that freedmen are citizens.  So that whole referendum to gain signatures, and then the vote of the people and then the four year court challenge all meant jack squat, because it was tribal law.  Freedmen are citizens as long as the judge in DC wants them to be, according to the court order.

Pretty harsh huh?  The judge really handed it to us on that one. Oh wait, the judge didn’t decide that! Crittenden decided that himself by signing the agreement.  Maybe he felt he needed to compromise and let the BIA have what it wanted and let the freedmen have what they wanted, but in doing so he ignored what the Cherokee people voted for in 2007, and he did so voluntarily.  Ouch.

The election will go forward on Saturday.  For the people who were Cherokee citizens on Monday, that’s their last chance to vote for chief.  For the people APCSJC decided to make citizens on Tuesday, they have until October 8 to vote. 

Let us make sure you understand what we're saying here: if you are Cherokee by Blood-- you can vote early in person Thursday in Tahlequah from 9-5, and in your assigned precinct on Saturday, the 24th. Your absentee ballot MUST be received by the Election Commission on Saturday. ONLY non-Indian Freedmen get extra days to vote. Check out the Cherokee Phoenix's online story today for all the hairy details.

 

P.S.  Late tonight we heard that Baker and Chuck Hoskin, Jr. are accusing Smith of colluding with Barney Frank to somehow keep HUD money while Smith was Chief.  When asked by Channel 6, they could produce no evidence, and Frank himself said it was bull BLEEP.  Really. Only he didn’t say bleep!  Watch the channel 6 story if you don’t believe us.  This time Baker is getting busted by the media and a Congressman immediately when he’s not telling the truth. We’ll see if it slows him down.

15 Days Until the New Election-The 2011 Annual Report to the Cherokee People, What Joe Crittenden (and Baker?) Didn't Want You to See

Click here to read the "top secret"
2011 Annual Report to the Cherokee People

We got ahold of the 2011 Cherokee Nation Annual Report and it’s hard to see what the fuss was about.  It looks nice, but it’s pretty non-controversial, considering it was banned/suppressed by Acting Principal Chief S. Joe Crittenden (APCSJC).

So what’s the Cherokee Truth?  Crittenden told the Tahlequah Daily Press that the report had messages from Chad Smith and Joe Grayson in it. Crittenden is right on thing--Smith does have a message on page 4, but the report also says he was chief from 2007-2011.  On page 8, there is a big picture of Grayson, but the ‘message’ is actually a story about how the doctors at Hastings saved his life when he had heart problems.  A ringing endorsement of our health care system by a guy who’s grateful for his life is pretty standard fare.  The fact that it’s a guy who’s been deputy chief for eight years just adds to it.

The document also has the names of all the incoming council members on the back, which looks like it might be a late addition or something, but still references the future leaders.

The rest of the document, like annual reports of previous years, is a look back on the past year.  It seems that Smith, Crittenden and Baker should all be happy for people to see the good things the Cherokee Nation has done.  Afterall, they were all on the council and/or chief last year.  

It’s a mystery to us why keeping this information out of the hands of the Cherokee people is in the interests of the Cherokee people at all.  By withholding the information, it looks like Crittenden and Baker don’t want people to have knowledge about the good things their government has done in the past year.  Why is that?

It’s one thing to find fault with what the Cherokee Nation has done-- every government can do things better, Cherokee Nation no exception.  But certainly they shouldn't mind giving employees credit for their hard work once a year, and letting citizens know what is going on and how their money is spent.

So take a look for yourselves. And if you want a hard copy, send a Freedom of Information Request to APCSJC. Be sure to include your name, mailing address and that you are requesting a copy of the 2011 Annual Report to the Cherokee People, as well as a copy of the video annual report (which we've not yet seen). You can even ask for multiple copies to hand out to your friends if they too would like to see what all the fuss is about. Here's his email address: joe-crittenden@cherokee.org so you won't even need a stamp!

19 Days until the New Election-Missing Anything?

The Cherokee National Holiday has come and gone and with all the differences between this year’s holiday and the usual ones, there is one thing that the media has picked up on:  The Cherokee Nation’s annual report was not distributed at this year's Holiday festivities.

The Tahlequah Daily Press and the Muskogee Phoenix both had stories on the lack of the report, which has become a staple of the Holiday over the years.  It usually includes things like contact numbers for programs and council reps, budget information and of course some feel good stories about the Nation. We do know what the annual reports look like for the past ten years or so, because they are posted on-line.  You should check them out if you haven’t because, again, there is a lot of truth and public information out there and it can dispel a lot of rumors.  The Cherokee Truth, if you will.

But back to the point: APCSJC has issued an order saying that the reports are NOT to go out this year at the Holiday, because, well, Crittenden is the Chief and he says so.  Crittenden points out that the report contains messages from Smith and Grayson (we’ll have to take his word for it) and they aren’t chiefs right now. All true. 

But in 2007, no one complained when outgoing council members like Taylor Keen and Phyllis Yargee, among others, were featured in the report.  Also, all the numbers in the reports are retrospective, from the year before. So, the information for this year's annual report to the people is from the year when Smith and Grayson were in office.

Acting Speaker of the Council Cara Cowan Watts (ASCCCW) isn’t happy about it though. She told the Muskogee Phoenix:  “The Cherokee Nation Annual Report has traditionally been passed out at Cherokee National Holiday for at least the past eight years.  By not following through with the report at Cherokee National Holiday, I believe Acting Chief Crittenden is violating the spirit of the Tribal Freedom of Information Act.”

Smith doesn’t like it either, saying “It’s understandable they feel like Bill John Baker and his friends are trying to keep information from the Cherokee people.”

Crittenden says he thinks the information is good ‘for the history books’ and that its up to the guy who gets elected September 24 to make the decision on what to do with the reports.  Until then, it looks like the Cherokee Nation has spent a bunch of money to NOT inform its citizens about what is going on.

We’d like to see a copy, just to see what the fuss is about and see if we can tell why APCSJC wants to keep a lid on it.  And to let everyone else see what the fuss is about.  If anyone comes across a copy, please let us know. As always, our email is cherokeetruth@gmail.com.

23 Days Until the New Election: Judge Not the Judges

More thoughts tonight on the recent Freedmen decision. We’ve seen a lot of comments from people online saying that the court which made the decision, did so to impact Chad Smith’s chances of re-election.  Like we mentioned yesterday, the perception seems to be that 1) the Supreme Court Justices knew that Freedmen were all Baker supporters; 2) that the Supreme Court wants to help Smith get re-elected; and 3) that the Court kicked the Freedmen out so that they couldn’t vote for Baker, thus making it easier for Smith to win.

This line of reasoning really does a HUGE injustice to our Supreme Court.  Whatever you think of them and their decisions, you do need to look at the public record.  Trivia time:  What is the only court in the whole United States to say that people who aren’t Indian at all (at least according to the Dawes Rolls) can be citizens of the Cherokee Nation?  

If you guessed the Cherokee Nation Supreme Court, you are right!

Federal courts have upheld the right of Cherokee nation to decide who its citizens are.  And we have, through our courts in the Allen case and through our 2007 Constitutional amendment.

Whatever your stance on the Freedmen citizenship issue, it’s easy for any Cherokee to be a little upset by the idea that the Cherokee courts are brilliant, infallible, legal minds when they rule in your favor, like they did in 2006 and again in Cherokee Nation district court in January.  But when the court rules against you, they are political hatchetmen?  Neither of those things is the CHEROKEE TRUTH.

The TRUTH is that if the Supreme Court wanted to make it easy for Smith to be Chief, they could’ve made him Chief back in July.  He asked them to, after all.  They counted the votes with their own hands and saw that Smith had more than Baker.  Most times, the person with the most votes wins an election, but the court said there were too many irregularities on behalf of the election commission and ordered a new vote.

Our point is, if the Supreme Court were going to do everything in their power to make Smith the Chief, he would’ve been sworn in a couple of weeks ago and he’d be front and center at the Cherokee National Holiday this weekend. 

To say anything about our court besides the fact that they are qualified, accomplished Cherokee attorneys who can impartially adjudicate the law is a disservice to them, and to some degree the Cherokee Nation as a whole.

Election Limbo Day 26: Second Verse, Same as The First

It’s déjà vu all over again.  Coming soon to the Cherokee Nation, a Principal Chief election featuring Chad Smith and Bill John Baker!  Just like the one we’ve had since March that was supposed to end in June, but now might last until, oh, Columbus Day or later.

The Cherokee Nation Supreme Court issued a one-page order (page 2 contained their respective signatures) that unanimously invalidated the general election and set the stage for a new election.

They did not order one be conducted within 30 days, or have special rules, like Baker asked for in court.  

That leaves it up to Smith to call a new election, which he says he will do next week after he meets with members of the tribal council and the election commission. 

Some interesting tidbits:  Smith says he’ll leave office on August 14, when his term expires, and no one knows what that means.  We assume whoever wins the Deputy race Saturday would fill in for a while, which raises the stakes there significantly.  

What conspiracy theory will Baker come up with next?

Also, Baker came out swinging again today, with some more outlandish Terry Rainey accusations.

It’s just a little weird that the very day the Court gives him what he wants, Baker still can’t help but throw out a conspiracy theory!  Baker seems to think people will actually believe that every member of the Supreme Court (who gave him the new election he wanted) watched the videotape and then covered up evidence of this Rainey guy monkeying with the election.  Oh, and also four election commissioners (including ones Baker helped appoint) also being in on the "fix."  Baker thinks those commissioners are corrupt--except when they conducted a hand recount and accidentally left out hundreds of Smith ballots.  According to Baker, when they did that, they were all doing a great job-- even when they stood up in court and said they’d screwed up.  But never forget that no matter what Baker says about the numbers being changed, he saw the actual ballots counted in front of his own eyes and in the end he got either four (his version) or five (the commission’s version) votes less than Smith.  

Bill John Baker's got more conspiracy theories than Oliver Stone.