* AT&T’s alleged motive to play ball, from today’s federal indictment of AT&T Illinois’ former president Paul La Schiazza…
Between in or around 2010 and continuing until in or around 2015, AT&T Illinois unsuccessfully worked to enact legislation in the Illinois General Assembly that would have made it easier to terminate its obligation to provide landline telephone services to all Illinois residents, which was commonly referred to as the carrier of last resort (“COLR”) obligation. AT&T Illinois projected that it would save millions of dollars through the passage of COLR legislation and the elimination of its obligation to provide landline services to all Illinois residents.
In or around 2017, AT&T Illinois continued to advocate for the passage of COLR legislation by the Illinois General Assembly. The General Assembly passed AT&T Illinois’s COLR legislation, contained in Senate Bill 1839, on or about May 31, 2017, but it was vetoed by the Governor of Illinois. Another version of the COLR legislation, contained in House Bill 1811, was passed by the General Assembly, and it was vetoed by the Governor again. The veto was overridden in the House and Senate on or about July 1, 2017, and the COLR legislation became law. Madigan voted in favor of House Bill 1811, and voted to override the Governor’s veto of House Bill 1811.
Beginning no later than in or around February 2017, and continuing through in or around January 2018, in the Northern District of Illinois, Eastern Division, and elsewhere, PAUL LA SCHIAZZA, defendant herein, did conspire with Michael J. Madigan, Michael F. McClain, and others known and unknown to the Grand Jury:
a. to corruptly solicit and demand, and to accept and agree to accept from another person things of value, namely, monetary payments to Individual FR-1 [Ed Acevedo], for the benefit of Madigan and Individual FR-1, intending that Madigan, an agent of the State of Illinois, be influenced and rewarded in connection with any business, transaction, and series of transactions of the State of Illinois involving things of value of $5,000 or more, namely, COLR legislation, in violation of Title 18, United States Code, Section 666(a)(1)(B)
The carrier of last resort language was inserted into the bill, the feds allege, by then-Speaker Madigan and Mike McClain. Their alleged motive was some money for Ed Acevedo, who left the House and was apparently looking for income.
a. On or about February 14, 2017, McClain sent an email to Individual ATT-1 asking for “a small contract” for [Ed Acevedo].
b. On or about February 16, 2017, LA SCHIAZZA informed AT&T Illinois employees that McClain had been assigned by Madigan to work on AT&T Illinois’s legislation as a “Special Project.”
c. On or about March 28, 2017, LA SCHIAZZA sent an email to Individual ATT-1 and Individual ATT-3 in which he indicated that McClain had called to ask if AT&T Illinois had $2,500 or $3,000 per month for a “small contract” for [Ed Acevedo].
d. On or about March 28, 2017, LA SCHIAZZA advised Individual ATT-1 and Individual ATT-3 that AT&T Illinois had received a “GO order” to hire [Ed Acevedo].
e. On or about March 31, 2017, LA SCHIAZZA wrote an email in which he advised Individual ATT-1, Individual ATT-2, and Individual ATT-3 that he had no objection to paying [Ed Acevedo] through an intermediary as a consultant, instead of directly as a lobbyist, “as long as you are sure we will get credit and the box checked.”
f. On or about March 31, 2017, Individual ATT-3 wrote an email in which Individual ATT-3 asked Individual ATT-1 and Individual ATT-2 the following about hiring [Ed Acevedo] through an intermediary as a consultant: “[A]re we 100% certain that we will get credit for being responsive?”
g. On or about March 31, 2017, Individual ATT-3 wrote an email to Individual ATT-1 and Individual ATT-2, in which he added, “I think remaining question is if we would get credit from the powers that be.”
h. On or about March 31, 2017, Individual ATT-2 wrote an email responding to the email referenced in paragraph 17(g) above, “I would hope that as long as we explain the approach to McClain and [Ed Acevedo] gets the money then the ultimate objective is reached.”
i. On or about March 31, 2017, Individual ATT-3 wrote an email responding to the email referenced in paragraph 17(h) above, “I don’t think Paul [LA SCHIAZZA] wants this based on ‘hope.’ We need to confirm prior to executing this strategy.”
j. On or about April 2, 2017, Individual ATT-1 texted McClain that he wanted to discuss a “consulting issue.”
k. On or about April 5, 2017, in connection with the payment of [Ed Acevedo], Individual ATT-3 submitted a false justification via email to a fellow AT&T Illinois employee in support of increasing the monthly payment made to Intermediary 4, so that Intermediary 4 could in turn pay [Ed Acevedo] $2,500 a month for the remainder of 2017.
l. On or about April 20, 2017, LA SCHIAZZA signed a contract amendment on behalf of AT&T Illinois that increased compensation to Intermediary 4 by $2,500 per month for April 2017 through December 2017.
m. On or about April 26, 2017, after Intermediary 4’s contract had been amended so that AT&T Illinois could make indirect payments through Intermediary 4 to [Ed Acevedo], Individual ATT-2, Individual ATT-3, and the owner of Intermediary 4 met with [Ed Acevedo] for the first time to discuss paying [Ed Acevedo] $2,500 per month to prepare a report on the political dynamics of the General Assembly’s and the City of Chicago’s Latino Caucus.
n. On or about April 28, 2017, after [Ed Acevedo] had rejected the proposal to indirectly pay him $2,500 a month as being insufficient, Individual ATT-1 contacted McClain and confirmed that $2,500 per month was sufficient.
o. On or about May 26, 2017, the Speaker’s office requested a complete roll call on Senate Bill 1839, which included the COLR legislation.
p. On or about May 31, 2017, Madigan voted in favor of Senate Bill 1839.
q. On or about June 29, 2017, after the COLR legislation had been added as an amendment to House Bill 1811, Madigan voted in favor of the amendment to House Bill 1811.
r. On or about July 1, 2017, Madigan voted to override the Governor’s veto of House Bill 1811.
s. On or about each date set forth below, the conspirators caused payments to be made to Intermediary 4 in the approximate amount set forth below, with a substantial portion of each payment intended for Individual FR-1:
- 06/01/2017 | $10,000
- 07/03/2017 | $10,000
- 08/01/2017 | $10,000
- 08/31/2017 | $10,000
- 10/03/2017 | $10,000
- 11/01/2017 | $10,000
- 12/01/2017 | $10,000
- 01/03/2018 | $10,000
- 01/31/2018 | $10,000
t. On or about each date set forth below, Intermediary 4 caused a check to be made to a company designated by Individual FR-1 in the approximate amount set forth below, for payments totaling approximately $22,500:
- 06/06/2017 | $2,500
- 07/10/2017 | $2,500
- 08/04/2017 | $2,500
- 09/08/2017 | $2,500
- 10/13/2017 | $2,500
- 11/17/2017 | $2,500
- 12/08/2017 | $2,500
- 01/11/2018 | $2,500
- 02/13/2018 | $2,500
All in violation of Title 18, United States Code, Sections 371 and 2.
- 47th Ward - Friday, Oct 14, 22 @ 10:45 am:
===United States Code, Section 666===
As if the Blame Madigan crowd needed more reasons to believe that MJM is the devil himself…
- OneMan - Friday, Oct 14, 22 @ 10:47 am:
== f. On or about March 31, 2017, Individual ATT-3 wrote an email in which Individual ATT-3 asked Individual ATT-1 and Individual ATT-2 the following about hiring [Ed Acevedo] through an intermediary as a consultant: “[A]re we 100% certain that we will get credit for being responsive?” ==
You can almost hear a fed say ‘Bingo’ when they read that…
- Tood Aloo - Friday, Oct 14, 22 @ 10:55 am:
Wow. I’m hopeful that it becomes clear to companies with lobbyists that anybody who says I can deliver this members vote with certainty should be heavily scrutinized. Lobbying for some in the old world was easy, so long as you were part of the Madigan organization. Real life lobbying for those not on that team is difficult, and requires hard work. Free passes are never free, ask AT&T.
- Moved East - Friday, Oct 14, 22 @ 10:56 am:
You know what stinks most is that the law passed and AT&T will benefit millions at the expense of us. Wish the law could be repealed, but it will not be.
- low level - Friday, Oct 14, 22 @ 10:57 am:
==the political dynamics of the General Assembly’s and the City of Chicago’s Latino Caucus.==
In theory I guess all he had to do was write any sort of report and Acevedo could have said “here’s the report. I did what i was hired to do”.
Question: why was Eddie Acevedo so important? Why him and not someone else? (Assuming he is guilty of course)
- Amalia - Friday, Oct 14, 22 @ 11:04 am:
agree, why was Eddie A so important? and to whom? who knows all the ins and outs of these agreements and is someone giving info to the Feds? after all, we know after death that someone was giving info to the Feds, so who is alive and now doing that? who can benefit from pointing the finger at others?
- Hannibal Lecter - Friday, Oct 14, 22 @ 11:04 am:
So it was bribery of Madigan to give Eddie Acevedo a contract? How? I have never heard of a person being bribed that never received any money in return.
- Anyone Remember - Friday, Oct 14, 22 @ 11:10 am:
The veto was overridden with GOP votes. In view of the previous veto being upheld, wonder want induced the GOP members to switch their vote?
- Donnie Elgin - Friday, Oct 14, 22 @ 11:12 am:
“On or about February 16, 2017…been assigned by Madigan to work on AT&T Illinois’s legislation as a “Special Project.” On or about March 28, 2017, …asked if AT&T Illinois had $3,000 per month for a “small contract” . On or about July 1, 2017, Madigan voted to override the Governor’s veto of House Bill 1811.
The Illinois way of how a bill becomes a law.
- Rabid - Friday, Oct 14, 22 @ 11:13 am:
Himself; the powers that be
- Three Dimensional Checkers - Friday, Oct 14, 22 @ 11:21 am:
===agree, why was Eddie A so important? and to whom? who knows all the ins and outs of these agreements and is someone giving info to the Feds? after all, we know after death that someone was giving info to the Feds, so who is alive and now doing that? who can benefit from pointing the finger at others?===
I don’t know there George Smiley. This is all over email. Once you have enough for the subpoena, you basically have AT&T because their employees felt compelled to put everything in writing.
- low level - Friday, Oct 14, 22 @ 11:24 am:
$2,500 a month was “insufficient” to EA. After McClain confers w him days later it was. I would have loved to hear that phone call…
- ;) - Friday, Oct 14, 22 @ 11:41 am:
So the feds are basically just coercing publicly traded companies through a bribe of their own, deferred prosecution agreements, into either corroborating what they want (with or without proof, or due process) or the companies—and their shareholders—face an even more expensive trial, the likes of which will crush your stock and investors. This is quite literally a bribe, and “graymailing.” It’s more of a bribe, by definition, than anything any of these folks are accused of. The public shouldn’t praise this sort of cartel cowardice; the public should be afraid of it and condemn it. If they’ve done something illegal, then do your jobs that we the taxpayers pay you to do and prosecute them. But if they haven’t or you don’t have the confidence and fortitude to go forward with a prosecution then take a walk. But the idea of the feds being able to use coercive tactics like this—unfettered, unchecked, and without any due process or oversight until after the fact— is downright wrong and a perversion of justice itself. To the broader conversation, can someone please define what lobbying is now? Because apparently the feds don’t know nor will the rest of us after this third world witch hunt is done.
- DuPage Saint - Friday, Oct 14, 22 @ 11:43 am:
It is about time to bust up these large utility corporations or any corporation that uses bribery as a business model. Judges always harp when sentencing a politician about abuse of public trust and an ongoing problem for Illinois. Well it takes two to tango put CEOs
In jail
- Friendly Bob Adams - Friday, Oct 14, 22 @ 11:52 am:
I don’t follow these cases closely, but it seems that Madigan did a lot of scheming without putting money in his own pocket. He is a rich man and didn’t need the money, I guess. But usually it’s tough to get indicted without self-enrichment.
- Rent free - Friday, Oct 14, 22 @ 12:12 pm:
And the madigan knew nothing crowd out on full force, all these allegations come back to him but he know nothing and everyone did it out of the goodness of their own heart…sure
- Jerry - Friday, Oct 14, 22 @ 12:28 pm:
@anyoneremeber: Great point about the GOP ripping the phones out of the hands of Seniors. Brings new life to the old AT&T jingle of “reach out and touch someone”.
- H-W - Friday, Oct 14, 22 @ 12:35 pm:
Three words you never want to hear.
Did conspire with.
- Lincoln Lad - Friday, Oct 14, 22 @ 12:48 pm:
I wonder how much of La Schiazza’s Newport home was paid for through bonuses earned through activity like this…
- low level - Friday, Oct 14, 22 @ 12:52 pm:
==madigan knew nothing crowd==
Ok- you win. Where does that get you? Can you get out of super minority status?
- Oswego Willy - Friday, Oct 14, 22 @ 12:54 pm:
This is so much.. mercy… whew.
There’s art, science, finesse, deference, and nuance to lobbying, the process as such, thru sponsors of bills, committee movements, amendments, passage, “other chamber”, process again…
My point is, a pay schedule for an individual in the process that seemingly links actions by 177 others, other lobbyists, other actors, this is a huge wow, and I’m fascinated how seemingly unrelated hurdles are given reward to alleged bad actors towards an outcome.
This timeline of movements and measures to those movements will go a long way.
If you think reading this I think it’s all bunk, think again.
I do want to see, grasp, understand, and know where the unseen lines were crossed to the seen lines of flat out silly to decisions on their face begin and end with “don’t take the money. Ever”
A jury will need to learn that even the best lobbyists find where pressure helps or hurts, and the worst lobbyists find the value and costs to ease any pressures.
We will see. Whew.
- Nobody Sent - Friday, Oct 14, 22 @ 1:00 pm:
I wonder if the feds are looking at the IL Commerce Commission too?
- Pizza Man - Friday, Oct 14, 22 @ 1:10 pm:
MJM: “Hello AT&T, I need to make a collect call to my attorney; I don’t have a cell.”
- Donnie Elgin - Friday, Oct 14, 22 @ 1:35 pm:
“it’s tough to get indicted without self-enrichment”
Rostenkowski was taken down by a $17,000 postage stamp scheme - he never pocketed it.
- OneMan - Friday, Oct 14, 22 @ 1:54 pm:
==So the feds are basically just coercing publicly traded companies through a bribe of their own, deferred prosecution agreements, into either corroborating what they want (with or without proof, or due process) or the companies—and their shareholders—face an even more expensive trial, the likes of which will crush your stock and investors. ==
Where to start with this: In 2021 ATT had 168.86 Billion dollars in revenue. It seems highly unlikely that even if ATT took this court, it would not have a material impact, the ‘crush your stock and investors’ sort of thing, if you will. Congratulations, however on being perhaps the first person here to think about poor old ATT and its shareholders.
I am also going to go out on a limb here and say I suspect ATT has good enough lawyers that if this was a big nothing burger, it wouldn’t have reached this point.
==The public shouldn’t praise this sort of cartel cowardice; the public should be afraid of it and condemn it. If they’ve done something illegal, then do your jobs that we the taxpayers pay you to do and prosecute them. ==
I think the job is to obtain justice, not to take people and entities to trial. Using your logic, no one should be able to plea down anything, everyone needs to go to court. Is that what you are saying? ATT has in fact gone to court in the past (that is how the original ATT was broken up), ATT is some small little entity, they can afford to defend themselves in court, they are not the ‘little guy’ by any definition.
=But the idea of the feds being able to use coercive tactics like this—unfettered, unchecked, and without any due process or oversight until after the fact— is downright wrong and a perversion of justice itself. ==
I am going to go out on a limb here and say ATT could, in fact, afford to go to court. So your argument is anything besides going to trial by the feds is wrong?
== To the broader conversation, can someone please define what lobbying is now? Because apparently the feds don’t know nor will the rest of us after this third world witch hunt is done. ==
I think most would agree that lobbying isn’t “hire this guy for a while to get this done” I suspect most people would agree with that definition.
- Chicagonk - Friday, Oct 14, 22 @ 2:54 pm:
@Nobody Sent - We can only hope.