The Epoch Times reported Monday, Nov. 27 on several experts admitting they were wrong for supporting COVID lockdowns. Unfortunately, that doesn’t include officials in Oklahoma like Tulsa Mayor G. T. Bynum. As this editor wrote in September, we are still waiting for Mayor Bynum to correct his mistake. Dear mainstream media, in now proven fact, Oklahoma Gov. Kevin Stitt was right, Tulsa Mayor Bynum was wrong.

Today the question is still on the table: When will the City of Tulsa make right with small businesses, churches and citizens harmed by the unscientific and, now proven unjustified lockdown during the COVID Panic?

Katie Spence for the Epoch Times writes, as “fall out over lockdown policies [has] become more pronounced, some lockdown proponents, like New York University Professor Scott Galloway, have admitted they were wrong for supporting lockdowns. ‘I was on the board of my kid's school during COVID. I wanted a harsher lockdown policy. In retrospect, I was wrong,’ Mr. Galloway told Bill Maher.

"’The damage to kids of keeping them out of school longer was greater than the risk. But here's the bottom line, myself, our great people at the CDC, I'd like to think the governor, we were all operating with imperfect information, and we were doing our best.’ he said, referring to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and then-New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo.

"Let's learn from it. Let's hold each other accountable, but let's bring a little bit of grace and forgiveness," Galloway said.

The funny thing about grace is that one must acknowledge a mistake for grace to be received. In Mayor Bynum’s case, his answer by email was an example of arrogance and ignorance for which he is well known, “The COVID mitigation practices you describe have not been ‘proven unjustified.’”

Anytime Mayor Bynum would like to correct that public position, this writer will gladly cover that news. Again, as this editor wrote in September.

Corrections by local Controligarchs are important as some Oklahoma Democrats still wear unhealthy masks and eagerly await the next contrived panic to destroy small business, personal economy, and religious practice. They cheer and applaud open pot shops and strip bars while churches closed. Big Box stores are healthy, they say, while small retailers are dangerous, declared government tools like Dr. Anthoney Fauci.

Our First Amendment Rights of freedom of Speech and Assembly, to say nothing of religion, were betrayed by government(s) at different levels. The press narratives supported Big Pharma Advertisers and Big Tech was happy to help. This cannot be allowed to happen again. To that end, this editor in upcoming interviews with candidates for the office of Tulsa Mayor will ask questions about the abuses of public health officials and how that abuse (lawlessness) can be prevented in the future. Consider this a petition for government at all levels to redress COVID grievances.

We must hold to the concept that our rights come from Nature and Nature’s God.

French Author Frederic Bastiat (1801-1850) wrote, “Life, liberty, and property do not exist because men have made laws. On the contrary, it was the fact that life, liberty, and property existed beforehand that caused men to make laws in the first place.

“The law is the organization of the natural right of lawful defense. It is the substitution of a common force for individual forces. And this common force is to do only what the individual forces have a natural and lawful right to do: to protect persons, liberties, and properties; to maintain the right of each, and to cause justice to reign over us all,” Bastiat declared.

To read the Katie Spence story from The Epoch Times,click here.

For the story, “Mayor Bynum Flubs the COVID Question” click here.

,Lockdown Advocates Now Say They Were Wrong, But Not Tulsa Mayor Bynum
Click on this headline to read the full report at Tulsa Today.

Editorial Analysis: President Joe Biden’s nominee for the vacant federal judgeship in the Northern District of Oklahoma endorsed by OK Senators James Lankford and Markwayne Mullin has managed to humiliate Oklahoma supporters, the Cherokee tribe, and her profession during her testimony to Congress.

As she was interviewed by Sen. John Kennedy, (R-La.) during Senate Judiciary Committee hearings, Sara E. Hill appeared ignorant of basic legal and Constitutional terms.

According to FoxNews.com, When Kennedy asked Hill the difference between a “stay” order and an “injunction” order — two orders frequently issued by federal courts — Hill stumbled through her answers.

“A stay order would prohibit, um, sorry. An injunction would restrain the parties from taking action. A stay order … I’m not sure I can, actually can, can give you that,” she said.

An injunction is an order from the court that prohibits a party in a case from performing or ordering a specified act as the case continues, either temporarily or permanently, sometimes referred to as a temporary restraining order.

A stay order is issued to stop the legal proceedings of a case in court Fox reported, further quoting Carrie Severino, constitutional lawyer and president of the Judicial Crisis Network from Severino’s X (formerly Twitter) saying, “How can an individual who wants to be a federal judge possibly not know this?” Severino also exclaimed, “This is not a trick question.” Click here for more from Fox.

In a story on CityNewsOKC.com, Editor Patrick B. McGuigan October 19 quoted several concerns of Oklahoma Governor Kevin Stitt on the nomination of Hill including that she is a longtime tribal government employee, most significantly as attorney general for the Cherokee Nation. Click here for that story.

Tribal Member or not, would you want a judge to rule on any case when they don’t know the definitions and or impact of Constitutional proceedings?

McGuigan wrote, “A review of her record points to involvement in the crafting of court filings in three significant set of issues involving Indian Country in Oklahoma — the 2020 McGirt v. Oklahoma case and its aftermath, the somewhat clarifying Castro-Huerta case, as well as the Hooper and Stroble cases.

“The cases, taken together, touch most of the significant questions concern McGirt and its aftermath — including reservation status, criminal justice jurisdiction, issues of tribal and non-tribal treatment of persons residing within “Indian Country” (beyond the definition of reservations and jurisdictional areas) and taxation, among other civil matters,” McGuigan added.

Gov. Stitt released a statement saying, “I have serious concerns about President Biden’s nomination of longtime tribal government Attorney Sara Hill to be a federal judge in Oklahoma. Why would President Biden nominate someone to the federal bench who has little, if any, experience as lead counsel in federal litigation? Furthermore, is the best choice an attorney general of a tribal government who has spent a great deal of time and resources actively suing the State of Oklahoma in an effort to overturn 116 years of Statehood and working to strip the state of our authority to enforce laws.

“We already know where she stands on important questions facing our state as to who has jurisdiction to write speeding tickets and whether members of her tribe should be exempt from paying taxes that fund schools and roads? It raises many questions as to whether this appointment is based on qualification or on a broader political agenda of the Biden administration to turn half our state into several federally managed reservations” the statement concludes.

Consider carefully. Could every person living in these newfound “reservations” be subject to tribal law in family, civil and criminal courts? What about enforcement? Will tribal politics, with a majority of voters living outside of Oklahoma, direct our liberty and ability to conduct all enterprise? Do they really want to end Oklahoma as we know it?

In one significant example, OK2A opposes Sara Hill because she has supported Red Flag legislation to remove firearms without “Due Process” in the Cherokee Nation.

Added to this public record The Federalist reporter Evita Duffy-Alfonso November 17 wrote “Oklahoma district judge nominee Sara Hill apparently lied about her previous pledge to ignore state abortion laws on Cherokee Nation land following the historic Dobbs v. Jackson ruling.

“During a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing on Wednesday, Sen. Mike Lee, R-Utah, asked Hill whether she had said that she “had no intent to enforce the law post-Dobbs.” Hill responded by claiming she “never said that.” However, video footage from her time as attorney general demonstrates otherwise,” Duffy-Alfonso continued. Click here for more from The Federalist.

From X users, The Federalist quotes political commentator Carl Jackson on the exchange with Sen. Kennedy, ““By the end of the first year of law school there wasn’t a student in the class that couldn’t answer that with ease.” Another X user said, “Did Sara Hill get her law degree from a Cracker Jack box? Or was it simply Woke University No Education School of Law?”

Oklahoma does have issues with the current State Court System, Human Services and the administration of justice, but to appoint a demonstrated incompetent Federal Judge is not going to help anyone.

Oklahomans would be wise to oppose this nomination and demand both Senators Lankford and Mullin retract their support of this nomination. There are other tribal attorneys that could serve honorably on the Federal bench after issues of jurisdiction in the State of Oklahoma are settled.

,Sara E. Hill: Cherokee Embarrassment
Click on this headline to read the full report at Tulsa Today.

Editorial Analysis: President Joe Biden’s nominee for the vacant federal judgeship in the Northern District of Oklahoma endorsed by OK Senators James Lankford and Markwayne Mullin has managed to humiliate Oklahoma supporters, the Cherokee tribe, and her profession during her testimony to Congress.

As she was interviewed by Sen. John Kennedy, (R-La.) during Senate Judiciary Committee hearings, Sara E. Hill appeared ignorant of basic legal and Constitutional terms.

According to FoxNews.com, When Kennedy asked Hill the difference between a “stay” order and an “injunction” order — two orders frequently issued by federal courts — Hill stumbled through her answers.

“A stay order would prohibit, um, sorry. An injunction would restrain the parties from taking action. A stay order … I’m not sure I can, actually can, can give you that,” she said.

An injunction is an order from the court that prohibits a party in a case from performing or ordering a specified act as the case continues, either temporarily or permanently, sometimes referred to as a temporary restraining order.

A stay order is issued to stop the legal proceedings of a case in court Fox reported, further quoting Carrie Severino, constitutional lawyer and president of the Judicial Crisis Network from Severino’s X (formerly Twitter) saying, “How can an individual who wants to be a federal judge possibly not know this?” Severino also exclaimed, “This is not a trick question.” Click here for more from Fox.

In a story on CityNewsOKC.com, Editor Patrick B. McGuigan October 19 quoted several concerns of Oklahoma Governor Kevin Stitt on the nomination of Hill including that she is a longtime tribal government employee, most significantly as attorney general for the Cherokee Nation. Click here for that story.

Tribal Member or not, would you want a judge to rule on any case when they don’t know the definitions and or impact of Constitutional proceedings?

McGuigan wrote, “A review of her record points to involvement in the crafting of court filings in three significant set of issues involving Indian Country in Oklahoma — the 2020 McGirt v. Oklahoma case and its aftermath, the somewhat clarifying Castro-Huerta case, as well as the Hooper and Stroble cases.

“The cases, taken together, touch most of the significant questions concern McGirt and its aftermath — including reservation status, criminal justice jurisdiction, issues of tribal and non-tribal treatment of persons residing within “Indian Country” (beyond the definition of reservations and jurisdictional areas) and taxation, among other civil matters,” McGuigan added.

Gov. Stitt released a statement saying, “I have serious concerns about President Biden’s nomination of longtime tribal government Attorney Sara Hill to be a federal judge in Oklahoma. Why would President Biden nominate someone to the federal bench who has little, if any, experience as lead counsel in federal litigation? Furthermore, is the best choice an attorney general of a tribal government who has spent a great deal of time and resources actively suing the State of Oklahoma in an effort to overturn 116 years of Statehood and working to strip the state of our authority to enforce laws.

“We already know where she stands on important questions facing our state as to who has jurisdiction to write speeding tickets and whether members of her tribe should be exempt from paying taxes that fund schools and roads? It raises many questions as to whether this appointment is based on qualification or on a broader political agenda of the Biden administration to turn half our state into several federally managed reservations” the statement concludes.

Consider carefully. Could every person living in these newfound “reservations” be subject to tribal law in family, civil and criminal courts? What about enforcement? Will tribal politics, with a majority of voters living outside of Oklahoma, direct our liberty and ability to conduct all enterprise? Do they really want to end Oklahoma as we know it?

In one significant example, OK2A opposes Sara Hill because she has supported Red Flag legislation to remove firearms without “Due Process” in the Cherokee Nation.

Added to this public record The Federalist reporter Evita Duffy-Alfonso November 17 wrote “Oklahoma district judge nominee Sara Hill apparently lied about her previous pledge to ignore state abortion laws on Cherokee Nation land following the historic Dobbs v. Jackson ruling.

“During a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing on Wednesday, Sen. Mike Lee, R-Utah, asked Hill whether she had said that she “had no intent to enforce the law post-Dobbs.” Hill responded by claiming she “never said that.” However, video footage from her time as attorney general demonstrates otherwise,” Duffy-Alfonso continued. Click here for more from The Federalist.

From X users, The Federalist quotes political commentator Carl Jackson on the exchange with Sen. Kennedy, ““By the end of the first year of law school there wasn’t a student in the class that couldn’t answer that with ease.” Another X user said, “Did Sara Hill get her law degree from a Cracker Jack box? Or was it simply Woke University No Education School of Law?”

Oklahoma does have issues with the current State Court System, Human Services and the administration of justice, but to appoint a demonstrated incompetent Federal Judge is not going to help anyone.

Oklahomans would be wise to oppose this nomination and demand both Senators Lankford and Mullin retract their support of this nomination. There are other tribal attorneys that could serve honorably on the Federal bench after issues of jurisdiction in the State of Oklahoma are settled.

,Sara E. Hill: Cherokee Embarrassment
Click on this headline to read the full report at Tulsa Today.

This past week the top homeschool football teams from across the country descended on Florida to compete to take home the trophy.  Hosted by the National Homeschool Football Association (NHFA), qualifying teams from Maryland, Virginia, Ohio, Texas, Oklahoma, and Missouri made their way out to Panama City Beach to compete for the win.  

Many homeschool sports in the Tulsa area are organized through NOAH, the Northeast Oklahoma Association of Homeschools, a non-profit organization that provides sports opportunities for homeschoolers in the region.  The Tulsa NOAH Jaguars have teams for football, basketball, baseball, tennis, cheer, track, and other sports.

Last year, the Tulsa NOAH Jaguars, led by coach James Ballinger, came home with the national championship after defeating the Georgia Force 42-9 in the final game.  This year, the Jaguars lost the semi-final game to the Tomball Warriors (from Texas).  This year, the Oklahoma City Patriots also made it into the competition, after beating the Jaguars at the end of the regular season 23-21.  They also lost their semifinal game to the Christ Prep Patriots (from Kansas City).

The two teams that don’t advance from the semi-finals compete in what is known as the “Homeschool Bowl” for 3rd and 4th place.  On Saturday afternoon, the Jaguars and the Patriots had a rematch in the Homeschool Bowl.  After a determined struggle by both sides, the Tulsa NOAH Jaguars emerged victorious, winning 21-14 and taking the third place spot.  Video of the Homeschool Bowl (and other NOAH Jaguar football games) can be found on the NOAH Jaguar Football Rumble page.

The NHFA national championship this year went to the Tomball Warriors, defeating the Christ Prep Patriots 17-0.

,Oklahoma Teams Place 3rd & 4th in the National Homeschool Football Championship
Click on this headline to read the full report at Tulsa Today.