Democrat Senator Caught ‘In Disguise’ At Riot, Tells Police Not To Arrest Vandals

A Democrat senator has been caught “in disguise” at a riot, telling police officers they are not allowed to arrest vandals.

Democrat Senator Louise Lucas was caught on newly-released body cam footage in Portsmouth, VA telling police they are not allowed to arrest vandals shortly before the infamous monument toppling by far-left vandals that left a protester critically injured.

Thanks to a Freedom of Information Act inquiry, the Democrat Senator has now been exposed for her endorsement of vandalism and her poor understanding of the laws of the land.

While the senator claims that she never officially condoned the vandalism, she stands by her words captured on video telling police that they’re not allowed to enact arrests for vandalism.

You can view the video here regrading the police interaction with the Democrat Senator:

LET report: Speaking to police at the riot, Sen. Lucas said the following:

“I’m Senator Louise Lucas. I know I’m in disguise, but they are going to put some paint on this thing. You cannot arrest them. You need to call Dr. Patton, because they are going to do it. You can’t stop them. This is city property.”

The “Dr. Patton” person that Louise was making reference to was none other than Lydia Pettis Patton, who serves as the city manager.

Chief Angela Greene was on site on June 10^th, telling protesters that they were not allowed to be defacing the monument, to which Senator Lucas responded to the chief with the following:

“They are now…They are now. Dr. Patton just gave permission though me. You need to give her a call. I talked to her 15 minutes ago. You need to give her a call.”

Chief Greene had informed Lucas that she had spoken with Dr. Patton within the past five minutes during said interaction – and noted that Dr. Patton granted no such permission. Senator Lucas simply responded with the following:

“This is city owned property.”

Dr. Patton was said to have later confirmed that no such directive was afforded to any elected official that police could not enact any arrests.

In a hilarious twist of irony, the same senator that aimed at preventing law enforcement from doing their jobs is trying to contort the law in regard to civil litigation – by suing an attorney for defamation of her character when the attorney started a petition to recall Senator Lucas for her behavior at the riotous vandalism site in June.

In a suit filed on July 1^st, Lucas alleges that attorney Tim Anderson defamed her for circulating a petition to have her removed from her elected position due to her incitement of riotous behavior on June 10^th. Considering that “truth as a defense” would be used in a civil matter like this, it’s a lawsuit with about as much weight as a feather on the moon.

Furthermore, with video evidence to support the petition circulated by Anderson, Senator Lucas’ attempts to file a frivolous suit for over $2 million would likely cause her more harm by way of public image versus any good that would come of it.

According to Anderson, Senator Lucas’ actions were completely aligned with inciting a riot:

“Senator Lucas told the crowd which turned into a riot, ‘Hey don’t worry about the police, I’m here you can do whatever you want with this statue’. That is inciting a riot and we know that because that is what the code section of Virginia says.”

Standing by her likely not-well-thought-out convictions, Senator Lucas swears that by Anderson alleging she committed a crime that he committed defamation:

“Anderson stated that I committed a felony. That is defamation per se. He stated that my actions had led to the death of a man. His statements were false and he knew them to be false.”

While Senator Lucas may feel she has an open-and-shut win for defamation, she doesn’t.

For one, she engaged in an event that was of public interest since there was massive news coverage after the man was struck by the statue that she permitted people to vandalize. Secondly, she’s an elected official (a.k.a., a person of public notability and scrutiny) that provided fodder for a respected opinion to comment on.

Thus, it’s a seemingly frivolous lawsuit. But hey, you reap what you sow.