He broke the law and didn't even bother to ask his Republican Congress for a Bill of Indemnity for two years.
Congress acted two years after the fact. You can't legalize or criminalize actions ex post facto, as nolu chan and GOPcapitalist have pointed out and documented for you with infinitely more patience than your utterly recalcitrant lying and pettifogging deserve.
Lincoln broke no law. He asked for no Bill of Indemnity, nor was such bill by that name passed by the Congress. They did, however, pass the Habeas Corpus Act of 1863, supporting his actions and authorizing more of the same.
"Congress acted two years after the fact. You can't legalize or criminalize actions ex post facto, as nolu chan and GOPcapitalist have pointed out and documented for you with infinitely more patience than your utterly recalcitrant lying and pettifogging deserve."
Those two posters are wrong on the subject and confused on the subject matter. They have demonstrated their ignorance regarding "ex post facto" (a misnomer) legislation on several occasions.
Congress is perfectly within their rights to pass retrospective legislation. Retrospective authorizations of Congress were upheld in the Prize Cases, for example. Your position appears, in part, in the dissent of that case.
You and your two "experts" can keep repeating the same old lies, but that won't make them truthful.