Congressman John Lewis’s biography gives him great moral and civic stature, but no special authority to say who is or is not a legitimate president. The issue is, does his accusation against Trump have merit and substance.
Trump responded to John Lewis with misdirection and non sequiturs. Trump did not challenge the substance of Lewis’s charge that Russia’s efforts to elect Trump damage Trump’s legitimacy. Lewis did not deny that Trump won 300+ electoral votes. He did question the legitimacy of a victory won in part with Russian cyberattacks, hacking, disinformation, and possible collusion with Trump’s campaign. Trump maligned Lewis and his district (crime infested? really, Trump? no crime problems in your own backyard?) but did not address what John Lewis actually said.
Lewis hit on one of the main reasons Trump could be perceived as illegitimate, and this past week revealed more about others: e.g. James Comey’s thumb on the scale. Something in his classified briefing yesterday enraged congressional Democrats.
Michael Flynn’s reported five phone calls with the Russian ambassador while President Obama was announcing the expulsion of 35 Russian spies/diplomats (not to mention contacts between Russians and Paul Manafort and Carter Page and, perhaps, Michael Cohen) look suspicious if not illegal if not traitorous.
If President Obama had good reasons to not go public in a strong and decisive way about all this during the campaign, that is between him and the co-authors of his memoirs. I do not know enough to condemn or approve of Obama’s silences.
Trump, weighing all the evidence as best I can, is susceptible to Russian (and perhaps Chinese or Iranian?) blackmail as long as he is president. His best defense is that we elected him knowing full well who he is. He was elected despite openly inviting Russia last summer to commit espionage against his political opponent. And that is a big problem.