Gag (out of) order
There are some things in this life I assumed I'd never do.
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 cullen@globe.com 
