Set the politics aside and look at the mechanics, because the governor piece runs straight into existing law. The Insurrection Act was written for exactly the case where a state won't act. 10 U.S.C. 253 applies when 'the constituted authorities of that State are unable, fail, or refuse' to protect rights or when federal law is obstructed, and 10 U.S.C. 252 lets the President call into federal service 'such of the militia of any State' as he considers necessary. No governor's consent required. Eisenhower did it in 1957 with EO 10730, federalizing the Arkansas Guard right out from under Gov. Faubus at Little Rock. There's also no legal mechanism for 'declaring' the federal government illegitimate. Texas v. White (1869): the Constitution 'looks to an indestructible Union, composed of indestructible States.' The Court left only two other routes: 'revolution or... consent of the States.' So if these recordings hold up, the question isn't protected speech. It's whether anyone moved from planning to an agreement to actually hinder the execution of federal law, which is the 18 U.S.C. 2384 line. Preserve the files and the metadata.