Is it a provocative tweet...absolutely, and intentionally so. It forces the Democrats to continue defending the wrong side of an 80-20 issue to most people on the streets in big cities run by Democrats over the last century.
It's curious how the last 2x times the Trump 2.0 sent in troops, in Los Angeles and D.C., Karen Bass and the LA City Council, Gavin Newsom and the CA Congress, and Muriel Bowser and the D.C. City Council, all remained in power and continue to this day in D.C. to exercise their rights and responsibilities as the duly and freely elected civilian government.
I mean, if Trump wanted a takeover, he would physically remove the government and install a puppet local government, ala Iraq in 2004 under G. W. Bush in the immediate post-OIF op.
I think Johnson and the fat billionaire Pritzker will be physically ok as their lie of "what else could we do?" is exposed against crime. Emotionally, they'll be slaughtered, but physically, they and their families will be fine.
This experiment in freedom didn't turn to shit just because G. H. W. Bush, Lyndon Johnson, JFK, Eisenhower, Woodrow Wilson, Grover Cleveland, Hayes, Grant, Lincoln, or Jackson sent in federal troops to local municipalities since 1807...lots of precedence in support of it.
Until there's a direct and actual threat against elected governments, I'm less than concerned about troops moving in.