So let’s see.....
Grant thought the right to unilateral secession did exist at the time of ratification of the constitution. I’d say he was correct in that as would anybody who read the provisos of the 3 states which issued them expressly reserving that right. I disagree with him that the right of each state to unilaterally secede somehow disappeared later....even though nobody actually agreed to that. Oh, and under the Comity Principle, every state is equal to every other state. Therefore any claims that states which were not among the 13 original states somehow had lesser rights is a non starter.
I then correctly cited the fact that the Northern Federalists thought they had the right to secede in the Hartford Convention. You have nothing to refute that.
As for Lincoln’s quote, res ipsa loquitor. It speaks for itself. Your attempts to weasel by claiming some imaginary semantic difference between revolution and secession is ridiculous. Just read what he wrote. He was plainly talking about secession. Americans had long championed secession as “a principle to liberate the world” as he put it. After all.....the 13 colonies seceded from the British Empire. I was right again.
Reading is indeed fundamental.
No he didn't.
No you didn't. You mindlessly parroted something you found online. You didn't cite a specific person, much less provide a link to their saying such a thing.
No he wasn't. If you knew anything about the context you wouldn't be embarrassing yourself right now.