(CAPITOL NEWS ILLINOIS) – Edison, the former chief lobbyist for electric utility Commonwealth, spent last week telling a federal grand jury how he bent over backwards to accommodate former Illinois House Speaker Michael Madigan’s hiring demands.

Witness Fidel Marquez, who became a ComEd executive and cooperated under the leadership of the prosecutor who questioned him, repeatedly said he and other utility leaders agreed to hire or contract with the powerful speaker’s allies so that Madigan would be “more favorable to ComEd’s legislative agenda.” .

Read more: ‘They were paid as a favor to Mike Madigan’: Feds’ star witness testified

But on Tuesday, an attorney for Madigan’s co-defendant, Mike McClain, ComEd’s longest-tenured contract lobbyist, began his cross-examination of Marquez by detailing his previous testimony and guilty plea in the 2020 bribery conspiracy.

“Don’t you think the purpose of this conspiracy was to trade jobs at ComEd in exchange for Mike Madigan taking action and not testifying at this hearing?” Cotter asked, referring to Madigan’s alleged action in accepting legislation ComEd introduced in Springfield.

“I said ComEd’s agenda should be viewed positively,” Marquez said.

“That’s right,” Cotter replied. “Not trading jobs for action”

“In my opinion, looking at the situation positively is an action,” Marquez said. he said.

Cotter’s line of questioning points to a U.S. Supreme Court decision this summer that narrowed federal bribery law to exclude “gratuities” (rewards given after an official action) and required a bribe to require an exchange agreement before the action.

But prosecutors say their case is not affected by the ruling because they follow the “stream of interest” legal theory, where a pattern of corrupt dealings over a long period of time is sufficient evidence of quid pro quo payment. Even if there is no evidence of a handshake agreement. The feds say the “flow of aid” in the case, which included dozens of business recommendations from Madigan and several major bills ComEd pushed and, in one case, was killed, spanned more than the 7 1/2 years at issue.

Read more: SCOTUS ruling could upend federal corruption cases for Madigan and allies | 40 years after he came to power and almost 4 years after his fall, former Speaker Madigan goes to trial

But on Tuesday, Cotter was barred from asking Marquez if he believed he had done anything illegal; this was something he was allowed to ask Marquez during cross-examination at last year’s “ComEd Four” hearing. That case ended with the unanimous conviction of McClain and three other former ComEd lobbyists and executives accused of bribing Madigan.

In his cross-examination of Marquez last March, Cotter noted that more than a year after he was approached by FBI agents in January 2019, even after agreeing to be a cooperating witness, Marquez still insisted he had done nothing criminal. . Cotter claimed that his eventual guilty plea to a single conspiracy bribery charge in September 2020 was a purely opportunistic move to avoid prison time.

Read more: ‘You had to make a choice’: Defense paints cooperating witness in ComEd hearing as opportunistic

With the jury outside the courtroom, the parties discussed the broad outlines of what Cotter might reveal during cross-examination, and Assistant U.S. Attorney Amarjeet Bhachu cited a report by FBI agents following an early interview with Marquez shortly after Marquez agreed to be a mole for the government. he quoted. .

“CHS (collaborating human resource) does not believe this is true, but that is the way things are done in Illinois,” Bhachu read from the report.

But U.S. District Judge John Blakey blocked Cotter from citing Marquez’s claim that he did nothing illegal during a meeting with FBI agents in January 2019.

Before Cotter began questioning Marquez on Tuesday, Bhachu wrapped up four days of direct examination with several instances in which McClain passed business advice from Madigan to Marquez.

In an August 2018 phone call between McClain and Madigan, the speaker offered to get Jeffrey Rush, the son of then-U.S. Rep. Bobby Rush, a consulting contract with the Illinois Department of Corrections for the future administration of Governor J.B. Pritzker. he had not yet won the governor’s mansion. Madigan acknowledged that Rush “got himself into a tailspin” by having a sexual relationship with a woman midway managed by IDOC while he was working for the agency.

“This is a guy I’d like to help somewhere along the way,” Madigan said.

Six months later, McClain and Rush didn’t talk about how McClain could help him find a job, and then another two months passed until McClain asked Marquez if ComEd could help. Marquez was secretly videotaping the question during lunch at the defunct Sangamo Club in Springfield, a hangout for many lawmakers and lobbyists. However, Marquez rejected the offer, saying that “it would be difficult for me to place him in a conscientious position within the company” after McClain outlined Rush’s indiscretions.

Madigan also tried to place Vanessa Berrios, the daughter of former Cook County Assessor and county Democratic Party chair Joe Berrios and the sister of former Democratic state Rep. Toni Berrios, for a job at ComEd in late 2018.

“My thought was there might be a spot for him at ComEd,” Madigan said during a December 2018 phone call with McClain.

The jury has already seen emails last week showing that ComEd’s parent company, Exelon, was prepared to remove Toni Berrios from its contract lobbying team at the end of 2016, but renewed her contract for 2017 after McClain submitted a request from Madigan.

Emails shown to the jury show McClain’s continued interest in finding a job for Vanessa Berrios; including an email to Marquez saying Madigan was asking questions about him on a weekly basis. However, Marquez stated that he ultimately refused to be interviewed.

During the 15 hours he spent on the witness stand as Bhachu questioned him, Marquez testified about dozens of instances in which McClain passed Madigan’s business advice from his political allies to residents of the 13th Ward power base on Chicago’s Southwest Side.

Read more: Jury hears Madigan co-defendant’s incessant demands for job placements at ComEd | ComEd lobbyist warns FBI mole to ‘keep Madigan happy’ and not engage in non-employment contracts

But McClain had made himself indispensable as both Madigan’s self-described “agerie” and ComEd’s chief lobbyist; So much so that even after officially retiring from lobbying in late 2016, Marquez convinced his boss to call McClain enough times for advice. creating a consulting agreement for him.

Before McClain officially became a ComEd consultant, she wrote an email to Marquez in early April 2017 asking whether McClain would continue her previous job of acting as a go-between for intern recommendations from the 13th Ward for ComEd’s summer internship program. he asked. .

“I’m not asking for any money,” McClain wrote. “It looks like maybe by next summer we can hire someone who will have the trust of the 13th ward and you (ComEd). You and I have a system, and so why take it over when you’re going to have to train from scratch to get someone else to work with you next spring?” that?

The jury had previously heard that McClain hoped that longtime Madigan staffer Will Cousineau would replace him as ComEd’s chief contract lobbyist when Cousineau left the speaker’s office in the summer of 2017. For pay, he eventually took a full-time job at a lobbying firm, but took on ComEd as a client in 2018 and 2019.

But by early 2019, there was still no one to replace McClain, and that was becoming a burden for both McClain and the speaker. In a lengthy conversation toward the end of Bhachu’s direct review, McClain and Marquez discussed the issue with former ComEd CEO Anne Pramaggiore, who was promoted to CEO of Exelon Utilities a year ago.

“We’re in a conundrum,” McClain said, explaining that Madigan called him and expressed mild disappointment that he didn’t know who to turn to regarding matters involving ComEd or Exelon because McClain was no longer around in his retirement.

At the time, ComEd was advocating for an extension of the “sunset” that the speaker’s team insisted was included in an earlier law that would give electric companies more predictable results when asking state regulators to approve increases in electricity prices. Other energy and environmental interests were launching their own legislative efforts in hopes that ComEd could be included in the bill.

“The person has to have (Madigan’s) trust and also the trust of the company… And that person has to be very careful,” McClain said, referring to a “code” that the contact would implicitly understand. “So, suddenly he comes up to you and says, ‘Would you mind taking a look at this resume?’ When I say. I mean, ‘Can you just let it go and try to get this done as quickly as possible?’ Something like that.”

McClain again nominated Cousineau for the role of mediator and said in a follow-up email that he would sit down with Cousineau to talk about it, saying “he has our friend’s trust,” using a euphemism he often uses for Madigan.

“Not an easy position,” he wrote. “Our friend is very, very careful to make sure people know and do what they need to do.”

Cotter spent hours cross-examining Marquez on Tuesday, determining McClain’s value to ComEd. Marquez acknowledged that McClain did a lot of work to repair the relationship between ComEd and the speaker, which was damaged around 2007 but was never strong because of Madigan’s long-standing skepticism of public services.

He also acknowledged that ComEd received job recommendations from multiple sources, including then-Senate President John Cullerton and then-House GOP Leader Jim Durkin, as well as other elected officials, ComEd contractors and employees. As a lobbyist and later consultant, McClain was tasked with maintaining the relationship between the utility and Madigan.

“So when Mike McClain passed along Mr. Madigan’s business advice to you, was that part of his job?” he asked.

“Yes,” Marquez replied.

Cotter also engaged in various lobbying efforts to show how McClain was building coalitions to pass bills, and not just calling the speaker. For example, as ComEd sought to defeat then-Attorney General Lisa Madigan’s 2018 effort, McClain got the speaker’s permission to kill her daughter’s bill, but McClain and other executives still had to go to great lengths to make it happen.

Cotter held a call between McClain, Marquez and Pramaggiore discussing the strategy for defeating the bill, which included an appeal to all stakeholders, from faith leaders to ComEd’s major customers and vendors to organized labor, the constituency Madigan values ​​most.

“Mr. McClain never said, ‘Well, why don’t I talk to the speaker and see if he can help us get this bill passed?'” Cotter asked Marquez. “It doesn’t say.”

“He doesn’t,” Marquez confirmed.

Cotter is expected to wrap up his cross-examination on Wednesday and pass the baton to Madigan’s lawyers.

Capitol News Illinois is a nonprofit, nonpartisan news service that distributes state government news to hundreds of news organizations statewide. It is funded primarily by the Illinois Press Foundation and the Robert R. McCormick Foundation.

Copyright 2024 WIFR. All rights reserved.