Click here: to donate by Credit Card
Or here: to donate by PayPal
Or by mail to: Free Republic, LLC - PO Box 9771 - Fresno, CA 93794
Thank you very much and God bless you.
Posted on 09/10/2026 1:53:36 PM PDT by CFW
The Indiana Supreme Court has declared incumbent Senator Spencer Deery the winner of his primary race against Trump-backed Paula Copenhaver.
When reached for comment, Deery said the court’s decision made him proud.
“This was a lot bigger than me,” he said. “It says that Indiana is a place where if you do everything right as a voter: you vote, you check all the boxes, you show your ID, you register, your vote should count.”
Paula Copenhaver did not respond to WFYI’s request for comment.
The decision ends a months-long legal battle over who is the rightful winner in Indiana’s 23rd Senate District. The initial count in the close race ended with Deery just three votes ahead of Copenhaver.
Copenhaver quickly called for a recount, challenging ballots and calling for voters to be subpoenaed; she claimed they had crossed over and voted for Deery despite being long-time Democrats.
The case then went to Indiana’s Recount Commission, which upset Deery’s win, tossing out a number of ballots for missing clerks signatures.
On Thursday, the Indiana Supreme Court weighed in on whether the recount commission erred in tossing out just enough ballots to tip Deery’s lead.
(Excerpt) Read more at wfyi.org ...
|
|
Click here: to donate by Credit Card Or here: to donate by PayPal Or by mail to: Free Republic, LLC - PO Box 9771 - Fresno, CA 93794 Thank you very much and God bless you. |
The recount showed a win by Copenhaver. The court reversed that decision and gave the win to the incumbent, Deery. A close race always defaults to the most leftist candidate in the race. It never fails.
Notice that judges never have these types of questions when it is a leftist that wins on a recount.
“During arguments, Justice Derek Molter asked whether there was an inherent problem in how the secretary of state’s office had weighed in on the ballots.
“It seems problematic to me that you have the secretary of state before the election saying if this scenario were to arise we will count the ballot and it’s only after the election when we know who that’s going to benefit that that view flips.”
Other justices asked whether the decision to exclude ballots sets a precedent moving forward.
Justice Geoffrey Slaughter asked whether the recount commission’s decision would set a precedent moving forward.
“They’ve decided in their exercise of their discretion here that they aren’t going to count ballots that are missing the clerk’s signature and seal,” he said. “Are they obliged to apply the same rule the next time?””
Once ineligible/fraudulent ballots are counted, they apparently can’t be “uncounted”.
Isn’t that convenient for the left?
The Senate is safe. So who cares if Republicans stay home and this RINO loses?
The Senate won't be safe until every last RINO has been eliminated.
We don’t really need elections at all. We can just have judges appoint winners. It’s what our democracy deserves.
Fair enough.
Did the commission follow the state constitution and existing laws? That should be the only questions that need to be answered. These judges are really losing any remaining credibility that they may have or have had.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.