I find this story amazing in its tone

Thu, 19 Mar 2009 10:09:32 -0700

The guy takes a bribe but because he represents the poorest districts he should get a break and we should not hold him too responsible.  Is that the point this guy is making?  I truly am mystified by the logic of the "progressive" way of thinking.


Kevin Cullen

Gag (out of) order

By Kevin Cullen Globe Columnist / March 19, 2009

There are some things in this life I assumed I'd never do.

Discuss
COMMENTS (6)

Walk on the moon.

Dunk a basketball.

Kiss Kate Winslet.

Stick up for Chuck Turner.

But having read the decision by US Magistrate Timothy Hillman ordering City Councilor Turner to do something he has never been very good at - i.e., keep his trap shut - it is impossible not to feel sympathy for Comrade Chuck and a little thing called the First Amendment.

Hillman's ruling is very lawyerly. He cites all the relevant case law and makes a strong argument that Turner's disclosure of any information prosecutors turn over to lawyers defending him against corruption charges would make a mockery of the process.

The government already did that. Hillman's order would make more sense had he issued it before the feds released the video showing FBI cooperating witness Ron Wilburn slipping Turner what Vinnie Piro once described as a little walking around money.

Anybody who hasn't seen that video, or read or heard talk about it, is either dead, deaf, or blind, and in any case is so insulated from everyday life as to preclude them from being qualified to sit in judgment of a parking violation, much less a man's liberty.

After the release and the media's unquestioning dissemination of the incriminating video, to suggest that Turner's talking about the case will somehow prevent him from getting a fair trial is a non sequitur.

Let's be honest here. Chuck Turner has already been tried in the court of public opinion, and it's probably safe to say that, his family and friends aside, this public court has found him guilty, based solely on the image of him taking a wad of cash. Turner can hold a myriad of press conferences on City Hall Plaza and point to evidence that undermines the government's case all he wants. Most people will remember only the video.

So, even as Wilburn says he has misgivings about entrapping Turner, the feds have already accomplished their goal of embarrassing, if not ruining, Turner.

Whatever you think of Turner, the two things he has in common with disgraced former senator Dianne Wilkerson, other than being photographed taking cash from Wilburn, is that he's black and represents the most marginalized people in the city. And if you don't think that is relevant, I'll have what you're having. People who know Turner don't believe for a minute he's corrupt in the old-fashioned sense of influence peddling or taking money to fund a high life. He doesn't have much influence. And he doesn't live high. Even some of Wilkerson's friends admit she's been ethically challenged for years.

Turner's problem, God love him, is that he thinks it's 1973 and you can still blame The Man for everything. At least he sticks up for poor people.

It's truly a marvelous public service that our government has performed, wiring up an agent provocateur and dispatching him to slip chump change into the hands of some minor politicians who just happen to represent the poorest people in the city. Meanwhile, the most powerful pols in town continue to practice legalized theft, grabbing our money with both hands, handing out jobs to relatives and cronies, padding their payrolls, boosting their salaries and pensions while ours get slashed.

There's no law against the way politics is practiced at City Hall and the State House. Steal legally and you can steal at will.

Welcome to Massachusetts, a one-party state, where the pols are the only ones having a party. We're just paying for it.

As for the embattled city councilor, if it comes down to choosing between him and a government that wants to limit free speech when it suits its purposes, I'm down with Comrade Chuck.

Kevin Cullen is a Globe columnist. He can be reached at [email protected]

© Copyright 2009 Globe Newspaper Company.
READER COMMENTS (6) Post a comment
At age 79, and having been in the “political trenches” for almost 50 years, including “time” served in Boston in the State Legislature, one still has to work with one’s own mind every day to try to keep everything in balance, and to try to see things as to what is fair, what is honest, and what is simple justice.

I do not know Boston City Councilman Turner. I live 70 miles west of Boston, and yet, if my life as an individual is to have any meaning to me, I have to set aside at least temporarily what one reads about Mr. Turner, and what many may think of Mr. Turner.

So each of us in our minds may be inclined to believe he is guilty or that he is not, so what is the problem of waiting until a Court of law, if it ever gets to that stage, decides, “guilt” or “innocence”.

You know, what we always brag about of our great country. You are innocent until proven guilty.

A matter involving the status of an alleged $1,000.00 incident that some refer to as a “bribe” involving a City of Boston public official, “a person of color”, certainly should be evaluated and properly responded to and dealt with.

But being publicly accused and publicly smeared, and then, by law, not allowed to defend yourself, while the smearing through the media continues relentlessly, can be a horrific agony, not that many may care if their own zealousness of condemnation is driven by severe “dislike” perhaps bordering on “hatred” of any individual.

In another matter of similar nature, the office of the State Attorney General was asked about the case of an elected official who it is said, did NOT have to pay on his $250,000.00 house mortgage for about a year, because of his political connections.

The same official, “who is white,” is alleged to have “ASKED” [received] a much larger amount of money than the $1,000.00 in the Councilman’s allegations, for “helping” with legislation before the legislature.

Was the alleged $1,000.00 a bribe to a person of color, or was it a political contribution. Many are condemning without asking.

Was the MUCH LARGER sum of money allegedly ask for by the “white” state official a “bribe” asked for, or was it a political contribution.
Shhhh! No one is even asking.

An earlier Massachusetts Crime Commission investigative finding of political matters of campaign financing, wrote of a “special odor of corruption” as a “mixture of genteel extortion and discreet bribery.”

Clearly documented , here in Massachusetts, Ethics and Public Integrity are “Cafeteria Style” where some politicians and others think we can arrogantly just pick and choose who we will pursue and condemn and who we will not. It would seem someone might want to challenge that publicly, for the common good of our Commonwealth, our Ethics and our Public integrity.

“Silence,” of course, of no response, would answer the question in and of itself.

I’m here. I’m not hiding. [email protected]

P.S. while reporter [Comrade] Kevin Cullen writes an article that has true merit for consideration, he seems to have to feel the need to “diminish” Councilman Turner at the same time by referring to him as “Comrade Chuck.”
by mottom March 19, 12:23 PM
Report Abuse
Short and simple this is a bag job, regardless of who authorized this "sting" on Turner. It just may be, as you suggest that this guy has been and is living in a bubble. If that's a crime, well I know a lot of criminals.
by icepack March 19, 11:21 AM
Report Abuse
use your D cup bras for shoulder pads, you might get to kiss Kate winslet.
by TOMGREENMALDENMASS March 19, 10:05 AM
Report Abuse
It's too bad that a gag order was imposed. The more Chucky T spoke, the more people became aware of what a buffoon he really is.
by hugo March 19, 9:35 AM
Report Abuse

Reply via email to