I now believe that PDJT urged patriots to come to DC last Wednesday so that he’d have an excuse and the circumstances to invoke the Act. Before invoking the powers under the Act, 10 U.S.C. § 254 requires the President to first publish a proclamation ordering the insurgents to disperse. Absent the patriots gathering, what insurgents was he going to ask to disperse?
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
There are four sections to the Insurrection Act, and these two sections are not related to crowd dispersal. So there was no need to bring a crowd and/or have people break into (or be invited into...) the Capital building to invoke the Act. Plus they’re gone now. Sec.334 is the one about dispersal.
Sec. 332. Use of militia and armed forces to enforce Federal authority
Whenever the President considers that unlawful obstructions, combinations, or
assemblages, or rebellion against the authority of the United States, make it impracticable
to enforce the laws of the United States in any State by the ordinary course of judicial
proceedings, he may call into Federal service such of the militia of any State, and use
such of the armed forces, as he considers necessary to enforce those laws or to suppress
the rebellion.
Sec. 333. Interference with State and Federal law
The President, by using the militia or the armed forces, or both, or by any other means,
shall take such measures as he considers necessary to suppress, in a State, any
insurrection, domestic violence, unlawful combination, or conspiracy, if it—
(1) so hinders the execution of the laws of that State, and of the United States
within the State, that any part or class of its people is deprived of a right, privilege,
immunity, or protection named in the Constitution and secured by law, and the
constituted authorities of that State are unable, fail, or refuse to protect that right,
privilege, or immunity, or to give that protection; or
(2) opposes or obstructs the execution of the laws of the United States or impedes
the course of justice under those laws.
In any situation covered by clause (1), the State shall be considered to have denied the
equal protection of the laws secured by the Constitution.
Understood. I’m not a lawyer but I know that President Trump is nothing if not thorough, and he is great at anticipating remonstrances to his decisions, both real and concocted.
The chief clause of the Insurrection Act, in its original 1807 wording (which has been thoroughly updated since to reflect modern legalese), reads:
An Act authorizing the employment of the land and naval forces of the United States, in cases of insurrections -
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, That in all cases of insurrection, or obstruction to the laws, either of the United States, or of any individual state or territory, where it is lawful for the President of the United States to call forth the militia for the purpose of suppressing such insurrection, or of causing the laws to be duly executed, it shall be lawful for him to employ, for the same purposes, such part of the land or naval force of the United States, as shall be judged necessary, HAVING FIRST OBSERVED ALL THE PREREQUISITES OF THE LAW IN THAT RESPECT (emphasis mine).
Pelosi and gang went after him for imaginary crimes so it’s reasonable that he’d want to make sure that he followed the letter of the law and made sure he had satisfied all the prerequisites for the IA’s invocation, whether or not my reading or your reading suggests it was necessary. It’s in the Act, so he made sure he did it so they couldn’t play gotcha and invalidate his invocation on that point alone.