[BitBucket]

And right next to that section in the same article that says what states may and may not do, so it's clear that Article I did not apply solely to Congress.

But those clauses describing restrictions on state powers are really just defining powers belonging to Congress.

In the event of a rebellion or invasion when Congress was not in session then the president should have the power to act to protect the country.

Sorry. I don't buy it. Every state had a militia. But the Federal government had virtually nothing. There was no need for the President to personally have the power to suspend habeas corpus.

[Non-Sequitur]

But those clauses describing restrictions on state powers are really just defining powers belonging to Congress.

Not entirely, no. Some restrictions are also prohibited of Congress. Congress can't pass ex post facto laws, for example, or bills of attainder.

Sorry. I don't buy it. Every state had a militia. But the Federal government had virtually nothing. There was no need for the President to personally have the power to suspend habeas corpus.

Congress disagreed with you. In 1792 they also gave the president the power to call up the militia on his own authority, should Congress not be in session, if invasion or insurrection required it.

It is likely that the founders intended that only the Congress be authorized to suspend habeas corpus. Should the matter ever appear before the Supreme Court I expect that the court would uphold that position. But the founders didn't say who may suspend it and the court hasn't ruled on the matter.