Thank you for the thorough and informative piece, Mr. Cornsilk.
I have some questions regarding item (10). I claim that IF the 1976 Constitution was approved by a popular vote (more yeas than nays, or 60-40 yeas to nays, or some such), then it must be regarded as "legal" irrespective of the amendment or replacement provisions in the 1839 Constitution. People can change or replace their method of government, including their Constitution, any time they want.
What is the significance of the CN new Constitution being "not legal" in your view? Is the CN government then a criminal enterprise? A fraud? Or simply not legally sanctioned, but otherwise legitimate?
Also, the U.S. apparently still deals with the CN only in historical issues concerning all Cherokees/Keetoowahs. So it seems to me that all the money recovered from the U.S., or supplied by the U.S., was and is controlled by the CN, and none by the Keetoowahs. Is this true?