CONCLUSIONS: The overwhelming amount of historical evidence clearly contradicts Lincoln's assertion that the Constitution "is silent as to which, or who, is to exercise the power" of suspending habeas corpus. Though legal relativists, loose constructionists, and even some otherwise reliable constitutionalists maintain that Lincoln's action of suspending habeas corpus was without constitutional flaw, the volume of evidence renders such a position insupportable. In addition to the unconstitutional suspension of habeas corpus, there remains the issue of the Merryman ruling. Lincoln's action of ignoring this ruling by failing to either abide by it or appeal it to the Supreme Court constitutes a violation of the United States judiciary branch's authority that remains on his record even if one were to hypothetically permit its unlikely reversal had it been appealed. The sum of these actions by Lincoln amount to clear and material violations of the United States Constitution. It is further not unreasonable to conclude that in other times, similar actions by a president of the United States would have been cause for his impeachment and removal from office.(emphasis mine)
Since Lincoln was not impeached, then your criticism should be to the House, which supported his actions, the very point that you are contending with.
http://www.landmarkcases.org/marbury/jefferson.html
"The question whether the judges are invested with exclusive authority to decide on the constitutionality of a law has been heretofore a subject of consideration with me in the exercise of official duties. Certainly there is not a word in the Constitution which has given that power to them more than to the Executive or Legislative branches."
—Thomas Jefferson to W. H. Torrance, 1815. ME 14:303
Another classic #3non-sequitur if there ever was one. You're still assuming that impeachment is the only means of congressional disapproval and seem impervious to anything that suggests otherwise. As I noted previously, your position is not derived from reason. Thus it is impervious to reason and I see no purpose in continuing a discussion of it any further.