Yeah who needs all those details anyway? </sarcasm>
You can call it an "insurrection" and do anything you d@mn well please, just as Lincoln did.
Not really, no. Lincoln faced a situation where the governors and legislatures themselves were leading the rebellion. That's not the case here. Neither the Washington governor or the Seattle mayor are denying the authority of the federal government so long as it is in keeping with the Constitution. Trump just cannot say "I'll deal with it." Article IV as well as the 10th Amendment say he can't. But, as I said, not that you have much concern about the Constitution.
It wasn't a "rebellion". Lawyer Lincoln called it one to justify unlocking the powers a president has to suppress a rebellion.
It was secession, not an effort to take over the existing government. It was a continuation of the process the founders asserted as a right in 1776.
Trump just cannot say "I'll deal with it." Article IV as well as the 10th Amendment say he can't.
I don't see your relevance for Article IV. Guaranteeing a Republican form of government would require Federal involvement in the enforcement of the 14th amendment if States do not enforce it themselves.
These rioters are denying the civil rights of other people, and these are clearly 14th amendment violations.
The state is standing by idly while the civil rights of American citizens are being infringed by rioters and insurrectionists.