Of course he only means that if a black President is being opposed... http://www.cnbc.com/2016/01/19/10-questions-for-veteran-congressman-john-lewis.html As to his Bush lie, well...he just forgot: http://dailycaller.com/2017/01/17/j...lycaller&utm_source=Twitter&utm_medium=Social So either he's lying or senile.
Just guessing, but perhaps he implied "respect the position" when fairly attained. I'm guessing he attended both Reagan's and Bush Sr.'s inaugurations.
That is my "hypothesis." We'll see how it all plays out in the fullness of time. Regardless, he will be president at the end of the week, and the planet will be in a world of drama.
Just a little US history lesson for you northerners, but Lewis wasn't elected until 1986. Reagan was inaugurated in '81 and '85. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Lewis_(Georgia_politician)
A bit contrived; too much letter manipulation. Much easier to just look at the first 3 letters of "conservative" in the order that they appear.
I respect your viewpoint, and note that you changed your overall language on it. Thank you for that. But as to "unfairly" winning, I consider the leak from Wikileaks similar to Mitt Romney's "47%" speech leak. I was pissed Romney lost to Obama, and that leak was probably one of the main reasons, but I never considered it "unfair". Romney was stupid for saying something like that, and even more so for letting it get out. Podesta was stupid for...well, everything.
I wasn't aware that you had to be in elected office to attend the inauguration. Is this something new?