Early in their final pitch to jurors on Wednesday, prosecutors displayed a screenshot from an undercover video: Michael Madigan, then the powerful speaker of the Illinois House, leaning forward with his hand out.
That image, secretly recorded by alderman-turned-FBI mole Daniel Solis, is surely the portrait of Madigan that prosecutors hope jurors will take back with them to deliberations – a politician laser-focused on what he could get for himself.
“Mr. Solis told Mr. Madigan that law business be sent to his firm in return for either Mr. Solis taking official action or Mr. Madigan taking official action. In exchange for those things,” Assistant U.S. Attorney Amarjeet Bhachu told jurors Wednesday.
“Mr. Madigan understood what Mr. Solis was saying. He was not confused.”
Bhachu also reminded jurors of the five Madigan allies who got cushy subcontracts from ComEd and AT&T Illinois for doing little or no work. Madigan and his co-defendant Michael McClain are accused of engaging in a bribery scheme to get their associates that money in exchange for Madigan’s support of the companies’ legislative agendas.
Bhachu scoffed at Madigan’s testimony that he had no idea they weren’t working.
“You did not only see lies during the course of this trial, you heard them as well, and you heard them right from the witness stand from this man right here,” Bhachu said, pointing to Madigan at the defense table.
“In fact, he’d had a conversation with Mr. McClain where Mr. McClain suggested to him somebody wasn’t really doing any work,” the prosecutor said. “And his response? ‘Some of these guys have made out like bandits, Mike.’”
“And you heard him laugh,” Bhachu continued. “In comparison to the purported anger he displayed on direct examination.”
Bhachu’s rebuttal Wednesday morning began the sixth day of closing arguments, which have included lengthy presentations from all three teams of lawyers. Jurors are slated to start deliberating shortly after Bhachu’s remarks wrap up.
The trial has lasted nearly four months, far past the initial estimates. The case represents the pinnacle of a lengthy federal corruption investigation that has already resulted in convictions of several other Madigan-adjacent figures over the past few years. Madigan, however, is inarguably the biggest target.
The evidence has included more than 150 wiretapped conversations and secretly video-recorded meetings that gave jurors a behind-the-scenes look at evidence behind some of the marquee allegations in the indictment.
Among them: meetings with developers at Madigan’s law firm and a separate alleged scheme by ComEd to funnel do-nothing subcontractor payments to Madigan associates, allegedly to enlist the speaker’s support for the utility’s legislative agenda.
Madigan, 82, a Southwest Side Democrat, and McClain, 77, a longtime lobbyist from downstate Quincy, are charged in a 23-count indictment alleging that Madigan’s vaunted state and political operations were run like a criminal enterprise to increase his power and enrich himself and his associates.
In addition to alleging bribery schemes involving ComEd and AT&T Illinois, the indictment accuses Madigan of pressuring real estate developers into hiring Madigan’s private law firm to do tax appeal work and offering to help Solis get a lucrative state board position in exchange for bringing developers to him.
In his closing argument, which stretched over two days beginning Friday, Madigan attorney Daniel Collins held little back, accusing prosecutors of engaging in “confirmation bias,” belittling McClain, as a self-aggrandizing name-dropper, and calling Solis the “malignant tumor at the heart of this case.”
Collins also urged the jury not to tap into the cynicism or suspicion that often accompanies public corruption cases and focus instead on the evidence, which he said failed to show Madigan ever acted with corrupt intent.
“Mike Madigan was not part of any racketeering enterprise,” Collins said near the end of his argument. “He was a public official who did his best. He’s made some mistakes, but he’s always tried to build consensus, to collaborate. That’s who he was. That’s who he tries to be.”
McClain attorney Patrick Cotter, meanwhile, argued on Tuesday his client was a diligent — if sometimes “blunt” and “earthy” — lobbyist who never agreed to or knew about any bribery scheme.
He only ever acted out of a commitment to his clients and a true respect for Madigan, Cotter said.
“Did this very real, very unique and — I would submit based on the overall evidence in this case — very decent human being actually have the intent to engage in a conspiracy to bribe the person he thought of as his closest friend?” Cotter asked.
On Wednesday, Bhachu said Madigan tried to minimize his relationship with McClain in his testimony in his own defense.
“If you were going to listen to his direct (testimony), what would you think?” Bhachu said. “You got more information from Mr. Madigan about working on a garbage truck than you did about his relationship with McClain.”
Bhachu said Madigan essentially told the jury the extent of his relationship with McClain was to pass him resumes. “You know that is not what their relationship was all about,” Bhachu said. You would have thought McClain was the postman, or akin to an Uber Eats driver.”
He also ridiculed the notion that Madigan was somehow just a non-confrontational guy who was afraid to say “no” to people, at one point mockingly referring to the once-powerful politician as “Michael ‘Milquetoast’ Madigan.”
As for Solis, Bhachu said “everything that was done was recorded” and that Madigan was in control.
“You can see what was said,” Bhachu told the jury. “That was not part of our script. (Madigan) chose what to say…this seasoned politician, this sophisticated lawyer. It was Madigan’s script.”
jmeisner@chicagotribune.com
mcrepeau@chicagotribune.com
rlong@chicagotribune.com
Early in their final pitch to jurors on Wednesday, prosecutors displayed a screenshot from an undercover video: Michael Madigan, then the powerful speaker of the Illinois House, leaning forward with his hand out.
Early in their final pitch to jurors on Wednesday, prosecutors displayed a screenshot from an undercover video: Michael Madigan, then the powerful speaker of the Illinois House, leaning forward with his hand out.
That image, secretly recorded by alderman-turned-FBI mole Daniel Solis, is surely the portrait of Madigan that prosecutors hope jurors will take back with them to deliberations – a politician laser-focused on what he could get for himself.
“Mr. Solis told Mr. Madigan that law business be sent to his firm in return for either Mr. Solis taking official action or Mr. Madigan taking official action. In exchange for those things,” Assistant U.S. Attorney Amarjeet Bhachu told jurors Wednesday.
“Mr. Madigan understood what Mr. Solis was saying. He was not confused.”
Bhachu also reminded jurors of the five Madigan allies who got cushy subcontracts from ComEd and AT&T Illinois for doing little or no work. Madigan and his co-defendant Michael McClain are accused of engaging in a bribery scheme to get their associates that money in exchange for Madigan’s support of the companies’ legislative agendas.
Bhachu scoffed at Madigan’s testimony that he had no idea they weren’t working.
“You did not only see lies during the course of this trial, you heard them as well, and you heard them right from the witness stand from this man right here,” Bhachu said, pointing to Madigan at the defense table.
“In fact, he’d had a conversation with Mr. McClain where Mr. McClain suggested to him somebody wasn’t really doing any work,” the prosecutor said. “And his response? ‘Some of these guys have made out like bandits, Mike.’”
“And you heard him laugh,” Bhachu continued. “In comparison to the purported anger he displayed on direct examination.”
Bhachu’s rebuttal Wednesday morning began the sixth day of closing arguments, which have included lengthy presentations from all three teams of lawyers. Jurors are slated to start deliberating shortly after Bhachu’s remarks wrap up.
The trial has lasted nearly four months, far past the initial estimates. The case represents the pinnacle of a lengthy federal corruption investigation that has already resulted in convictions of several other Madigan-adjacent figures over the past few years. Madigan, however, is inarguably the biggest target.
The evidence has included more than 150 wiretapped conversations and secretly video-recorded meetings that gave jurors a behind-the-scenes look at evidence behind some of the marquee allegations in the indictment.
Among them: meetings with developers at Madigan’s law firm and a separate alleged scheme by ComEd to funnel do-nothing subcontractor payments to Madigan associates, allegedly to enlist the speaker’s support for the utility’s legislative agenda.
Madigan, 82, a Southwest Side Democrat, and McClain, 77, a longtime lobbyist from downstate Quincy, are charged in a 23-count indictment alleging that Madigan’s vaunted state and political operations were run like a criminal enterprise to increase his power and enrich himself and his associates.
In addition to alleging bribery schemes involving ComEd and AT&T Illinois, the indictment accuses Madigan of pressuring real estate developers into hiring Madigan’s private law firm to do tax appeal work and offering to help Solis get a lucrative state board position in exchange for bringing developers to him.
jmeisner@chicagotribune.com
mcrepeau@chicagotribune.com
rlong@chicagotribune.com
More in Politics
Discover more from World Byte News
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
