[pluto9]

It seems to be even more complicated than that actually, on second glance. Also from the Wikipedia article:

> Supervision and control of D.C. National Guard was delegated by the president to the defense secretary pursuant to Executive Order 10030, 26 January 1949 with authority to designate National Military Establishment officials to administer affairs of the D.C. National Guard. The Army secretary was directed to act in all matters pertaining to the ground component, and the Air Force secretary was directed to act in all matters pertaining to the air component.

> The National Guard may be called into federal service in response to a call by the president or Congress.

So control is apparently shared in some way between the president, secdef, congress, and secretaries of the army and air force. But it does seem that the Army secretary's authority is delegated by the president, who remains the "commander in chief" of the guard unit.

Of course the president is commander in chief of all guard units when they're called into federal service, but I wonder if service in DC is considered "federal" in that sense. DC is a federal entity, but a guard unit serving its home jurisdiction isn't usually what's meant by "federal service".

Military organization is weird.

In any case, it's not controlled by the mayor of DC. She can only request an activation (which she did).

[willis936]

Half a trillion dollars a year and the DoD can’t even keep the capital secure. I’m embarrassed for the entire US military industrial complex right now. They look like a bunch of freshmen to the world.

[pluto9]

"The DOD" (actually just a single National Guard unit) was ordered not to by their civilian leadership until a few hours ago. This has nothing to do with the military's budget or capabilities and everything to do with civilian oversight of it, which is a very good thing. It would be far more embarrassing to have the kind of military that could act on its own accord to secure the capital, which is what a large fraction of "the world" that's supposedly looking down their noses at them has.

It would sure be nice if these kind of histrionics stayed off of HN.

[willis936]

I’m not quite sure I understand your point. A military’s job shouldn’t include security of the legislative head? Half a trillion dollars a year is absurd for defense and having the capital security being entirely handled by capital police begs the question: where are my tax dollars going? The obvious answer is to keep the military industrial complex afloat.

Don’t be disparaging. This is a real conversation even if you don’t like what it brings to light.

An actual alternative narrative is that the executive branch willfully did not defend the capital. That makes this a more standard coup.

[pluto9]

> A military’s job shouldn’t include security of the legislative head?

Yes, our military does not do that. That is the job of law enforcement. Look up the Posse Comitatus Act.

There's a lot to be said about the evils of the military industrial complex, but you're making that point in the worst possible way. Complaining that your tax dollars are being wasted because the military is too lazy to perform duties that they are explicitly not allowed to perform for very good reasons does not bring anything to light.

> An actual alternative narrative is that the executive branch willfully did not defend the capital.

It isn't a matter of narrative, it is a simple fact that the executive branch chose not to authorize an exception to Posse Comitatus in this case, which is what the National Guard does and requires specific authorization each and every time. Without that authorization, the military has no more authority in D.C. than the NYPD does. It's quite simply outside of their jurisdiction.