I’ve read these quotes before, but again instead of that, how about refute the link I sent?
It was the start of the slide. Slavery was going to die on it’s own.
Bulwyf: "I’ve read these quotes before, but again instead of that, how about refute the link I sent?
It was the start of the slide.
Slavery was going to die on it’s own."
Your link is the usual Lost Causer pap, easily answered for anyone interested in the truth of the matter.
But you're not, are you?
Your only interest is in indicting Lincoln for a long list of alleged crimes, and that's what your article does.
When I get time I'll go through your link and answer any items which have not already been addressed by others here.
But be forewarned, the truth is often long & boring and you most likely will refuse to read it, because that's not what you want.
Condemning Lincoln is what you want, truth be d*mned, right?
Fair enough. Let's take them one by one.
Failed to call Congress into session after the South fired upon Fort Sumter, in direct violation of the Constitution.
Before I can refute the I would need to have you please point out the clause of the Constitution Lincoln is supposed to have violated. And I would point out that Lincoln did call Congress back into session. It met in July.
Called up an army of 75,000 men, bypassing the Congressional authority in direct violation of the Constitution.
Same as the first one; what clause of the Constitution did Lincoln violate?
Unilaterally suspended the writ of habeas corpus, a function of Congress, violating the Constitution. This gave him the power, as he saw it, to arrest civilians without charge and imprison them indefinitely without trial—which he did.
One can argue whether Lincoln had the power to suspend habeas corpus in cases where Congress was not in session. He may have, he may not have, the Constitution isn't clear and the Supreme Court has never ruled on it.
Ignored a Supreme Court order to restore the right of habeas corpus, thus violating the Constitution again and ignoring the Separation of Powers which the Founders put in place exactly for the purpose of preventing one man’s using tyrannical powers in the executive.
The Supreme Court never issues such an order. Chief Justice Taney did, but he was acting in his position as head of a Circuit Court. Then entire court never took the matter up.
When the Chief Justice forwarded a copy of the Supreme Court’s decision to Lincoln, he wrote out an order for the arrest of the Chief Justice and gave it to a U.S. Marshall for expedition, in violation of the Constitution.
This is a complete fabrication, and I offer as evidence the fact that not a single one of Roger Taney's biographers found enough evidence to support the claim to include it in any of their biographies of the man.
Unilaterally ordered a naval blockade of southern ports, an act of war, and a responsibility of Congress, in violation of the Constitution.
What makes that an act of war if you are blockading your own territory? War against whom?
Commandeered and closed over 300 newspapers in the North, because of editorials against his war policy and his illegal military invasion of the South. This clearly violated the First Amendment freedom of speech and press clauses.
I have heard that claim over and over and have never been able to find a list of those 300 newspapers. I haven't found a list of 100 papers or 50 or 30. Can you provide it? Once we have it then we can discuss the propriety of the closures.
Sent in Army forces to destroy the printing presses and other machinery at those newspapers, in violation of the Constitution.
See above.
Arrested the publishers, editors and owners of those newspapers, and imprisoned them without charge and without trial for the remainder of the war, all in direct violation of both the Constitution and the Supreme Court order aforementioned.
See above.
Arrested and imprisoned, without charge or trial, another 15,000-20,000 U.S. citizens who dared to speak out against the war, his policies, or were suspected of anti-war feelings. (Relative to the population at the time, this would be equivalent to President G.W. Bush arresting and imprisoning roughly 150,000-200,000 Americans without trial for “disagreeing” with the Iraq war; can you imagine?)
In his book "The Fate of Liberty: Abraham Lincoln and Civil Liberties" Mark Neely shows claims like that were completely false.
Sent the Army to arrest the entire legislature of Maryland to keep them from meeting legally, because they were debating a bill of secession; they were all imprisoned without charge or trial, in direct violation of the Constitution.
Again a complete falsehood. Some members of the Maryland legislature were arrested in September 1861 when the tried to take Maryland into rebellion with the other Southern states but it was a minority, and a small minority at that. Considering they were advocating rebellion what reaction should the government have had?
Unilaterally created the state of West Virginia in direct violation of the Constitution.
Another complete falsehood. If you read the Constitution you would see the President plays no part in the admission of a state. Congress admitted West Virginia, and the followed the Constitution while doing it.
Sent 350,000 Northern men to their deaths to kill 350,000 Southern men in order to force the free and sovereign states of the South to remain in the Union they, the people, legally voted to peacefully withdraw from, all in order to continue the South’s revenue flow into the North.
Lincoln fought the rebellion the South forced on him. Sorry if that bothered you.