* Click here to read the US Attorney’s “Santiago Proffer.” Tribune…

Two months ahead of trial, federal prosecutors late Tuesday revealed new details of wiretapped conversations and other evidence they intend to use against four people accused in an alleged bribery scheme between Commonwealth Edison and then-House Speaker Michael Madigan. […]

— A ComEd lawyer is expected to testify that the man accused of orchestrating the scheme, ex-lobbyist Michael McClain, had such a longstanding and close relationship with Madigan that he was sometimes referred to within ComEd as a “double agent.” […]

— In 2016, McClain wrote a letter Madigan saying he wanted to let his “real” client know he was retiring from lobbying, but still willing to do “assignments” for him. “I am at the bridge with my musket standing with and for the Madigan family,” he wrote, according to a copy included in the filing. […]

— Former McPier boss Juan Ochoa is expected to testify how he enlisted the help of a member of Congress [Luis Gutierrez] in 2017 to help repair his tattered political relationship with Madigan and ultimately secure a lucrative position on ComEd’s Board of Directors.

— Prosecutors also intend to call Ed Moody, the former Cook County Recorder of Deeds and longtime 13th Ward precinct captain, who will testify Madigan told him it was ok that he was being paid by ComEd for doing next to nothing because he was “a valuable political operative” and that campaign work “was what was important to Madigan.”

Ed Moody is gonna testify? Whew.

* Moody is identified only as Individual 13W-3 in the proffer…

The government expects to call Individual 13W-3 as a witness at trial. Individual 13W-3 is one of the subcontractors who was paid through intermediaries such as Doherty, Intermediary 2, and Intermediary 3. The government anticipates that Individual 13W-3 will confirm that Individual 13W-3 performed little or no work in return for payments received indirectly from ComEd, and that the payments were made simply because Individual 13W-3 was a valuable political operative for Madigan. […]

Individual 13W-3 will testify that s/he received a series of patronage jobs—other jobs that Madigan secured for Individual 13W-3 as compensation for Individual 13W-3’s work as a precinct captain and for other political campaign work Individual 13W-3 performed for Madigan. These patronage positions included jobs in local government.

Individual 13W-3 continued to work very hard for Madigan on political campaigns, in part because Individual 13W-3 enjoyed the work, and in part out of fear that Madigan would threaten Individual 13W-3’s government job. Indeed, Individual 13W-3’s understanding was that if Individual 13W-3 did not perform well during political campaigns, Madigan could cause him/her to be removed from their government job.

Individual 13W-3 is expected to testify that, in addition to the government positions that Madigan obtained for Individual 13W-3, Madigan also arranged for Individual 13W-3 to receive additional money. Specifically, Individual 13W-3 asked Madigan for a job as a consultant or lobbyist where Individual 13W-3 could make an additional $45,000 per year, so that Individual 13W-3 had sufficient funds for his/her retirement. Ultimately, Madigan informed Individual 13W-3 that s/he would be “working for McClain.” Individual 13W-3 knew McClain to be a part of Madigan’s “kitchen cabinet,” that is, s/he knew McClain to be one of the Madigan’s closest confidants and advisors. However, Madigan told Individual 13W-3 that he (Madigan) controlled the contract, and that if Individual 13W-3 left the organization (meaning Madigan’s political organization), Individual 13W-3 would no longer work for McClain. […]

Individual 13W-3 will testify that payments from Intermediary 2 ended, and he began receiving payments from Intermediary 3, who was a lobbyist and former Illinois State Representative who was close to Madigan. Intermediary 3 received a consulting contract from Intermediary 3 that referenced providing services to ComEd. Individual 13W-3 signed the contract that suggested that Individual 13W-3 would provide services to ComEd, but it was apparent quite quickly that Individual 13W-3 was not going to do any work for ComEd.

Specifically, Individual 13W-3 will testify that approximately two to three weeks after receiving the contract from Intermediary 3, Individual 13W-3 had a conversation with Madigan while Individual 13W-3 was out doing campaign work in the 13th Ward. During that conversation, Individual 13W-3 expressed his/her concern to Madigan that Individual 13W-3 had not been doing any work for ComEd as the contract suggested.

Madigan responded that Individual 13W-3 did not have to worry about that, because what Individual 13W-3 was doing right then—meaning campaign work—was what was important to Madigan. Madigan further told Individual 13W-3 that Individual 13W-3 was doing what Intermediary 3 and ComEd wanted Individual 13W-3 to be doing. Individual 13W-3 understood Madigan to be referring to political campaign work for Madigan, and further understood s/he did not have to worry about doing any work for ComEd. [Emphasis added.]

Boom.

* Sun-Times…

In summer 2018, months before it became apparent they were the targets of a federal investigation, then-Illinois House Speaker Michael Madigan was reminded by a longtime confidant about a contract they’d help someone land that tied the person to ComEd.

Madigan then interrupted his confidant, Michael McClain. The men were allegedly near the end of an almost decade-long scheme, in which they convinced ComEd to give Madigan’s associates jobs, contracts and money in order to curry favor with the speaker.

“Some of these guys have made out like bandits, Mike,” Madigan quipped, according to a newly released transcript of the conversation that was caught on a federal wiretap.

“Oh my God, for very little work too,” McClain said, coughing amid his response. “Very little work.”

Now, federal prosecutors say that conversation is evidence that Madigan and McClain understood that people employed by ComEd at Madigan’s request were doing little or no work for the utility. “Indeed,” Assistant U.S. Attorney Amarjeet Bhachu wrote, “many of the Madigan subcontractors made out like thieves, just as Madigan observed.”

* Check out the Mapes reference…

The government anticipates introducing recordings of other benefits the defendants sought to solicit and confer on Madigan. For example, on or about December 11, 2018 (McClain Phone, Session #18290), Madigan asked McClain if he had received a resume for a named individual who was related to a local public official, and told McClain that his “thought was there might be a place for her at ComEd.” McClain advised Madigan he would bring the resume with him when he had breakfast with Marquez.

As another example, on or about April 9, 2019 (McClain Phone, Session #17513), John Hooker had a telephone call with Marquez. During the call, Hooker reported to Marquez that Pramaggiore was exploring hiring Madigan’s former chief of staff [Tim Mapes], who had left his position in the wake of allegations of harassment made by other State employees. Hooker explained that Pramaggiore wanted to have the former chief of staff work for her, but Pramaggiore wanted to “pay him but hide his contract in someone else’s,” and Hooker had suggested “put him in as a consultant with McClain.” McClain similarly suggested to Marquez that ComEd could “hide things” by employing Madigan’s former chief of staff as a consultant through a third party in an intercepted phone call. (McClain Phone, Session #3870.) Of course, Pramaggiore’s and McClain’s proposed method of concealment of payments to Madigan’s former chief of staff had been employed by the coconspirators with the Madigan subcontractors for years to great effect.

As another example, on February 16, 2019, McClain spoke to another ComEd lobbyist, in follow-up to that lobbyist’s request that Madigan help him secure more lobbying work. McClain acknowledged that the lobbyist had come to see the Speaker; McClain told him that “we’re on it” and “this is [Madigan’s] return call.” The lobbyist told McClain that he was hoping to get more work and acknowledged that he enjoyed his work for ComEd. McClain Phone, Session #20021. This call demonstrates that McClain acted as Madigan’s agent (“this is his return call”), and Madigan arranged for McClain to help to secure consulting work at ComEd and other companies for individuals connected to Madigan.

* McClain wasn’t wrong when he said Madigan was his “real” client…

On or about November 16, 2018 (McClain Phone, Session# 14849), Madigan reviewed his efforts to gather votes to be re-elected Speaker with McClain, discussed McClain arranging to have a message passed to Illinois’ Joint Committee on Administrative Rules concerning a prior directive issued by Governor Rauner. In addition, McClain asked Madigan when McClain should call a named State Representative that Madigan wished to retire and “lower the boom” on the State Representative; Madigan instructed McClain to do so “sooner rather than later.” Thereafter, on or about August 11, 2018 (McClain Phone, Session #15167), McClain called the named State Representative to tell them that “this is no longer me talking, I’m an agent,” on behalf of someone [Madigan] who thought the Representative ought to “move on” and was not interested in moving the State Representative “up in leadership.” (McClain made a number of other calls in which he discussed his communications with that State Representative on Madigan’s behalf.

* Remember this?…

On or about September 5, 2018 (McClain Phone, Session #12860) during a telephone call between Madigan and McClain, Madigan asked for McClain’s advice on how to respond to the Senate President, who was understood to have authorized political advertisements to be broadcast that cast Madigan in a negative light. McClain advised Madigan to “let your agents do it for . . . now,” “I’d let us handle this for twenty-four, forty-eight hours and if [the Senate President] by that time hasn’t called you, then I guess you, you’re gonna have to call him . . .”

* ComEd’s former senior vice president of external and governmental affairs Fidel Marquez lays it out…

Marquez learned after he assumed this position that two Madigan associates— Individual 13W-1 and Individual 13W-2—were being paid by ComEd as “subcontractors” through JDDA, and soon after, a third Madigan associate, Individual 13W-3, was added as a subcontractor. Marquez will explain that the payments to Individual 13W-1 and Individual 13W-2 continued through the entirety of his service as Senior Vice President of Governmental and External Affairs,8 and the payments continued to Individual 13W- 3 until and including 2018 (though Individual 13W-3 was paid through multiple third parties, including JDDA, Intermediary 2, and Intermediary 3 as discussed further below).

Marquez will testify that (i) he never asked any of these individuals to perform any work for ComEd, and did not expect them to perform any work for ComEd; (ii) Marquez was never informed they were performing work for anyone at ComEd; and (iii) none of them had any unique skills that ComEd needed or wanted. The method of paying them—that is, as subcontractors—was unusual. The intermediaries, like JDDA, served as “pass through” entities in order to pay the subcontractors. Marquez is expected to further testify that while paying individuals as requested by Madigan and McClain did not guarantee legislative success, the purpose of the payments was to influence Madigan and to ensure Madigan did not act against ComEd and its legislative requests and agenda due to a failure to fulfill his hiring requests.

Emphasis added.