Are Democrats Sweating the Madigan trials?
Former House Speaker Michael Madigan is at the heart of the trial of the so-named “ComEd 4” underway in Chicago and faces his own criminal trial next year.
The federal trial of a former Commonwealth Edison executive, two lobbyists, and a close confidante of former House Speaker Michael Madigan has provided explosive moments implicating the former political powerbroker and has already shed light on the House of Cards-style politics played during Madigan’s reign.
53 of 77 House Democrats (Democrats are down one after the resignation of Rep. Fran Hurley) served while Madigan was Speaker and another handful were elected thanks in part to Madigan’s financial support in 2020.
“There are more than a few [in the House Democratic caucus] concerned they’ll be implicated in something they may have had nothing to do with while [Madigan] was off doing his own thing,” said one Democratic legislator. “Nobody wants their name to show up in the transcripts.”
Rep. Bob Rita (D-Blue Island) was called to the stand yesterday in the ComEd 4 Trial, and the veteran lawmaker was put squarely on the record about Madigan. Via the great Jon Seidel of the Chicago Sun-Times:
A veteran Democratic state lawmaker who sponsored major gaming legislation in the Illinois House of Representatives told a federal jury Monday that former Speaker Michael Madigan once ruled that chamber “through fear and intimidation.”
When asked what Madigan valued most in other legislators, state Rep. Robert “Bob” Rita answered, “loyalty.”
And before the trial of four former political power players broke for the day, the Blue Island Democrat cited the case of a fellow Democrat who dared side with Republicans — only to have Madigan’s organization turn on him in an election.
Rita’s testimony is expected to further underscore the notion that McClain acted as an agent for Madigan and passed along the speaker’s demands. When asked who, besides Madigan’s senior staff, had a close relationship with Madigan, Rita named McClain, who served in the legislature decades ago.
Rita called McClain a “former member of the House and a lobbyist and a friend [of Madigan’s].”
Rita is expected to continue his testimony this morning.
Former Rep. Lou Lang, who was forced out of the House in 2018 amid sexual harassment allegations, testified last week. Via Hannah Meisel of Capitol News Illinois:
Government lawyers played several other recordings of calls from McClain’s cell phone that they had wiretapped in 2018 and 2019. They included a call where his directives from Madigan were confirmed by the speaker himself.
“You know, I think the guy’s going to be a continuing problem, that’s my expectation,” Madigan said of Lang. “And I mean, you can understand my position, right? I have to sit and think…do I appoint him to the leadership or not?”
In federal court Thursday, Lang testified that after McClain’s call and a subsequent meeting with Madigan, he understood that he’d never achieve his ultimate ambition in his legislative career: rising from third-most senior leader in the House to deputy majority leader and eventually House speaker.
“It was very clear to me that there had been a decision made by the speaker that I was not going to move up in the ranks, and the reputation I had built over 32 years was not going to avail me to much progress in my career,” Lang said Thursday during government questioning.
“In my entire 32-year career, Mike Madigan never ordered me to do anything,” Lang said of his experience with the speaker.
In playing other snippets of McClain’s calls, the government sought to discredit the arguments made in the defense’s opening statements the day prior, in which Cotter said McClain’s and Madigan’s close relationship wasn’t evidence of any conspiracy.
“Do you call your friends for advice?” Cotter asked the jury Wednesday. “Do you call your friends at work? When you do that, are you entering a conspiracy or is that friendship? I’d argue it’s the very nature of friendship.”
Over a handful of recordings, the government let McClain’s words speak for themselves as the former lobbyist explained who his true client was.
“I finally came to peace with that maybe 20 years ago when I convinced myself that my client is the speaker,” McClain said in a call to a top staffer in Madigan’s office, who said he was struggling with always making decisions with Madigan’s best interest in mind.
“My client is not ComEd, my client is not (the Chicago Board Options Exchange), my client is not Walgreens, my client is the speaker,” McClain said in the call. “…If that’s the way you think, if that’s the way you frame your talking points, (Madigan will) never second-guess you.”
Other Democrats say they don’t believe there’s a lot for current Democrats to worry about, especially as many are in safe districts or haven’t been hurt by Madigan in the past.
“Republicans haven’t been able to make Madigan an effective election message in the last 20 years,” said a Democratic operative we spoke to Monday. “What makes you think a bunch of extremists without any money and no record to run on are going to make it work now? We’re not losing any sleep.”
“It hasn’t come up [in meetings],” said another Democratic lawmaker. “I’d say it’s on its own island for most of us.”
Former Reps. Carol Sente and Scott Drury have also been called by the prosecution thus far.
Some other current sitting Democrats, like Rep. Kelly Cassidy (D-Chicago) and Rep. Jennifer Gong-Gershowitz (D-Glenview) have been name dropped, but they were not referenced in a positive light to Madigan and his supporters.
Madigan himself isn’t scheduled to go on trial until next year, so the speculation (and questions from any responsible media) will continue for quite some time.
