|
*** UPDATED x2 *** Madigan declines invite to testify before House committee, denies he’s taking the 5th, again calls hearing a “political stunt,” asserts innocence, says Durkin had “intense involvement” with ComEd bill
Friday, Sep 25, 2020 - Posted by Rich Miller * Click the pic for a better view…    *** UPDATE 1 *** From the committee’s chair, Rep. Chris Welch…
The correspondence received by the committee is here. Still no statement from Rep. Welch on the planned appearance by an as-yet-unnamed witness from ComEd. *** UPDATE 2 *** House Republican Leader Jim Durkin…
|
- SSL - Friday, Sep 25, 20 @ 4:05 pm:
Shocking.
- Oswego Willy - Friday, Sep 25, 20 @ 4:06 pm:
Why make this a Friday News Dump?
It’s *more* than fair… beyond fair game… if Durkin is compelled to gone a statement, Durkin should face questions from the same committee he feels compelled to speak *at*.
I still *think* Madigan should resign, I still am confused what will be accomplished with this activity as designed.
Where are the 60, as Dems have stepped forward calling for resignation, House members to do something?
- Grandson of Man - Friday, Sep 25, 20 @ 4:07 pm:
Just let the feds finish their investigation and move on to other things that greatly need attention.
- Dotnonymous - Friday, Sep 25, 20 @ 4:07 pm:
This may look exactly like a comment …but it isn’t.
- legaleze - Friday, Sep 25, 20 @ 4:08 pm:
==Why make this a Friday News Dump? ==
I think the original letter requested a response by today
- Oswego Willy - Friday, Sep 25, 20 @ 4:12 pm:
=== I think the original letter requested a response by today===
Ya think anything changed from the date of the letter, or yesterday… to today?
:)
- Anon y mouse - Friday, Sep 25, 20 @ 4:13 pm:
He declines to participate in a hearing occuring per his rules in his chamber? That’s the equivalent of taking the fifth and because this isn’t a criminal tribunal and the burden is “conduct unbecoming” that equals an admission and is grounds for removal. #GOPWins
- Jibba - Friday, Sep 25, 20 @ 4:14 pm:
On first reading, I gotta say it sounds pretty reasonable. How this holds up will depend on the testimony of others. Will anyone say they acted on his orders or with his knowledge? If no former staffers do, and Exelon doesn’t allege any specific conversations or requests for bribes by him, then this seems to grind to a halt pending the federal investigation. Hope Durkin is ready for questions about his role, too. Maybe he will change his mind about appearing?
- Donnie Elgin - Friday, Sep 25, 20 @ 4:14 pm:
=Helping people find jobs is not a crime=
Not always - it depends upon what the something for something is.
- Phenomynous - Friday, Sep 25, 20 @ 4:16 pm:
And so continues the ever so entertaining dance between the “Blame Madigan” folks and Sgt. Schultz “himself”.
- Donnie Elgin - Friday, Sep 25, 20 @ 4:17 pm:
Never write when you can talk. Never talk when you can nod and never nod when you can wink
- Oswego Willy - Friday, Sep 25, 20 @ 4:19 pm:
=== “…The charge itself does not actually allege any action by me, but rather urges this Committee to conclude that I engaged in conduct unbecoming of a legislator based on the actions of others alleged in the DPA…”===
“Oh yeah, a buffer. The family had a lot of buffers”
- Oswego Willy - Friday, Sep 25, 20 @ 4:23 pm:
Also this…
=== “…The charge itself does not actually allege any action by me, but rather urges this Committee to conclude that I engaged in conduct unbecoming of a legislator based on the actions of others alleged in the DPA…”===
If the Feds had the direct connections already, why would they give over a $200 million break in fines to ComEd *and* ask for more help in the investigation… publicly.
We all kid, we all really don’t know what the Feds have, but I know it’s a phrase like that, seemingly, that’s keeping Madigan from Defendant and still a “person of interest”.
- Curious George - Friday, Sep 25, 20 @ 4:23 pm:
Nothing to see here , let’s move on as always
- Keyrock - Friday, Sep 25, 20 @ 4:23 pm:
Madigan still carefully avoids commenting on whether he expected political work (or donations) from the people he helped find jobs. Even under his carefully worded statements, he doesn’t exclude the possibility that both he and Com. Ed. may have known that the company was indirectly providing something of value to the Speaker by accepting his recommendations as to employment and giving jobs to his political workers.
- Anon y mouse - Friday, Sep 25, 20 @ 4:25 pm:
Calling Governor Pritzker, what say you, sir, about the Speaker’s failure to appear & answer questions?
- Pundent - Friday, Sep 25, 20 @ 4:31 pm:
Interesting that Madigan would reference the “intense involvement” of Durkin. Didn’t have to be said, but it was.
- Oswego Willy - Friday, Sep 25, 20 @ 4:32 pm:
=== Calling Governor Pritzker, what say you, sir, about the Speaker’s failure to appear & answer questions?===
“It’s voluntary. It’s up to the House to see to its own business”
- Precinct Captain - Friday, Sep 25, 20 @ 4:43 pm:
Subpoena Rauner and Durkin.