interest, at least, in a negotiated resolution that might include cooperation. i think that s a key development. it means something is probably close to happening in that case. you spent a lot of your professional life as a prosecuter. as you watched this play out, does general flynn, as he made the moves of someone who is taking steps toward cooperating? certainly not that we ve seen publicly. the only step we ve seen along those lines is the one we saw recently. there s been a lot of speculation because of the seriousness of the potential schashlgs against him and his son that he has every reason to cooperate, but then at the same time you saw through the pardoning of joe arpaio, stick with me and i ll have your back. the arpaio case hadn t reached sentencing yet. this at least gives the appearance he may be cooperating. there s another wrinkle in the story. one of president trump s reported contacts over the
analysis. you criticize that, but also criticize them, saying there s a generational gap, saying they re out of touch. do you think you went too far in criticizing i didn t describe them that way. did you use the phrase generational gap? actually, it s a character one of the characters in the book talks about that. look, the scene that you re describing was a scene in which they had decided to kind of lift the tent a little bit and let people know what they were thinking about doing. they knew how controversial it would be. the controversy surrounding this book, it was you know, this was a controversy playing out at the time, when this case was first people first learned about it in this movement. yes, there was a group of people who felt that the movement had slowed down. people like cleave jones, who was the creator of the eighth quilt. and that younger people could see a future, you know, in a clearer way, and could ask for more. clearly some of that presents
they were saying it rests on that. you have to understand it s a love story like a heterosexual. what was interesting in the kennedy brief, and i ve talked to lawyers a lot of different lawyers. what was interesting in the kennedy decision is how he kept coming back and back and back to the importance of marriage. and that, the importance of marriage, it was a blending of these two and the argument from the people involved, and windsor came so vividly from the windsor briefs. robbie said, if the prop 8 case hadn t been next to her, they might not have ruled as broadly as they do. even your staunchest critics have said it raises awareness. one thing people do take issue, though, is the beginning of this book. you write, quote, this is how a revolution begins. you re talking about an election of a party in 2008, with the number of activists that people like andrew sullivan.
violence that happens in inner cities, in atlanta, in los angeles, and chicago, and other places, we have to stand up and make it clear that we will remember this come november. reverend, are you going to apply this law and ban guns in your own church? oh, absolutely. we will not allow firearms in our churches. i should say to you that the gun lobby actually wanted this gun law in terms of churches, it s now opt in. they wanted it to be opt out. which would have meant we would have had to have a sign on our church saying no guns allowed. in this case, we indicate that we don t intend to opt in. but i still think it s a bad idea. i m baptist, so our churches operate by congressional policy. so this introduces a kind of dissension in our churches where boards will have to vote whether to allow guns or not in their churches. we didn t have this problem.
and i think that there are many, many people who deserve a ton of credit for getting the country to the place that where we re at now. but the truth is, that this case garnered huge headlines. the pairing up of this kind of marquee lawyers attracted mainstream press in a way that it really hadn t before. this cause had not. everybody was writing about this case. maureen dowd was there. there were tv crews there. there was a documentary on cnn about this case. i think the newsworthiness of the case and the decision that i made, spending the four years writing about it, is absolutely, you know, that that news judgment is held up by take a look at nexus. there are important stories in here that all of that access provided. and they re moving and they re certainly educational. but one of the things that the critics take issue is how you define the old guard. they re making a cost benefit