* Jason Meisner and Ray Long…
Former House Speaker Michael Madigan’s attempt to suppress the dozens of wiretapped calls and secret recordings that form the backbone of the government’s bombshell racketeering case is a “flimsy effort to create an air of impropriety where none exists,” federal prosecutors said in a motion Tuesday.
* From the federal filing…
Defendant Michael Madigan was the leader of a corrupt criminal enterprise, the tentacles of which extended from the Office of the Speaker of the Illinois House of Representatives in Springfield, to the Thirteenth Ward Democratic Organization on the south side of Chicago. For approximately eight years, through the operation of this criminal enterprise, Madigan exploited his position as a high-ranking public official to manipulate the levers of State and local government for the purpose of illegally enriching himself and his associates. Madigan, together with his loyal lieutenant Michael McClain—a self-described soldier and faithful agent for Madigan—arranged for a flood of corrupt payments and perks to be doled out to Madigan and his associates in exchange and as a reward for Madigan’s abuse of his official powers.
Major corporations handed out more than one million dollars in bribes to Madigan’s cronies to secure Madigan’s assistance and favor with respect to the passage of legislation worth hundreds of millions to the companies. Madigan was sure to line his own pockets as well through the abuse of his official position. Without batting an eye, time and again Madigan stood prepared to take official action in his capacity as an Illinois Representative and Speaker of the Illinois House of Representatives, at times with the connivance and assistance of his confederate McClain, in exchange for legal work being steered to his private law firm. Indeed, Madigan was prepared to exploit the official positions of others, including Chicago Alderman A, in order to personally benefit himself.
* Prosecutors justify the personal benefit argument by relying on an alleged attempt by Madigan to pick up a new law firm client in Chinatown by transferring property ownership from the government to private hands…
Here, Madigan’s and McClain’s scheme was designed to facilitate the transfer of public property to private hands—exactly the scenario contemplated by the Kelly Court. Moreover, unlike in Kelly, the Chinatown parcel did not play “some bit part in a scheme.” The entire object of the scheme was to transfer the real property and to allow Madigan to privately benefit from the transfer by cashing in on the associated real estate tax work.
* Back to the Tribune’s story…
The [defense] motions have focused largely on an Aug. 18, 2014, meeting at Madigan’s law office where developer See Wong, who was secretly cooperating with investigators due to his own misdeeds, met with the speaker, [then-Ald. Daniel Solis, who was also cooperating and wearing a wire], and a Chinese real estate magnate who wanted to build a hotel in Chinatown.
The roughly half-hour meeting formed the basis of future wiretap requests for Solis and was also included in later applications to tap a phone belonging to McClain, which led to numerous recordings of Madigan himself.
The defense motion said prosecutors improperly “theorized” in their original 2014 application that Madigan and his law partner had conspired with Solis, who at the time was the head of city’s Zoning Committee, to threaten to withhold Solis’ approval of a zoning request unless the developer hired Madigan’s law firm. […]
It wasn’t until 2018 that the government, in a footnote “buried” in the McClain wiretap application, acknowledged Solis’ statements denying any quid pro quo at the meeting. But the footnote also tried to “spin” Solis’ comments by adding he’d admitted “an independent observer would interpret” what was said at the meeting as pressure to hire Madigan’s firm.
But even that alleged Solis admission has been challenged because he would only tell prosecutors “I see (your) point.” Also, the Chinatown deal was never consummated because no bill was passed.
- Hannibal Lecter - Wednesday, Jul 12, 23 @ 2:08 pm:
=== Here, Madigan’s and McClain’s scheme was designed to facilitate the transfer of public property to private hands—exactly the scenario contemplated by the Kelly Court. Moreover, unlike in Kelly, the Chinatown parcel did not play “some bit part in a scheme.” The entire object of the scheme was to transfer the real property and to allow Madigan to privately benefit from the transfer by cashing in on the associated real estate tax work. ===
This doesn’t seem to be supported by anything we have seen so far. I will wait to see what evidence the Feds have to support this claim.
- Three Dimensional Checkers - Wednesday, Jul 12, 23 @ 2:12 pm:
This is probably obvious to some, but it sounds like the Feds stumbled on the ComEd stuff after going after Madigan for the legal work.
- NIU Grad - Wednesday, Jul 12, 23 @ 2:25 pm:
Is it just me, or do parts of this filing look…casually written? “lining pockets,” “cashing in,” “cronies.” Aren’t these normally written with more legalistic writing?
- Huh? - Wednesday, Jul 12, 23 @ 3:25 pm:
“Madigan was sure to line his own pockets as well through the abuse of his official position.”
Got proof?
Seems to be speculation.
- Halfback option - Wednesday, Jul 12, 23 @ 4:12 pm:
Three Dimensional, the order seems to be thus:
Solis meeting with developer gives them McClain tap —-> McClain tap gives them Fidel conversations re lobbying —->Marquez confrontation gives them Marquez tap & video
They also love to charge conspiracy and the more conspirators the better.
- Just Me 2 - Wednesday, Jul 12, 23 @ 4:54 pm:
Just love how the people on this blog love to support Madigan’s way of doing business. I wonder why that is?
- Sue - Wednesday, Jul 12, 23 @ 4:54 pm:
Huh- I guess you can continue doubting the strength of the fed’s case all the while Madigan gets his graduate degree at Oxford up in Wisconsin
- Anyone Remember - Wednesday, Jul 12, 23 @ 5:01 pm:
===I wonder why that is?===
Perhaps we remember far far worse things under Walker, Thompson, Edgar, Ryan, Blago, & Quinn?
- Oswego Willy - Wednesday, Jul 12, 23 @ 5:01 pm:
===people on this blog love to support Madigan’s way of doing business.===
There’s a fine line between horse trading, criminality, and just plum greed… all three converge together.
I dunno about liking or supporting or even cheering these MJM ways, but finding out where the criminality supersedes it all will be a big teach to a lot of folks, mostly lobbyists since any of those who plead guilty in cases before “saw” where they crossed a line.
With respect
- Three Dimensional Checkers - Wednesday, Jul 12, 23 @ 5:16 pm:
===Solis meeting with developer gives them McClain tap —-> McClain tap gives them Fidel conversations re lobbying —->Marquez confrontation gives them Marquez tap & video===
Seems like it. The Feds keep repeating the Tribune’s Madigan talking points even though it seems they cannot actual prove them, and it is not what the criminal charge is about.
- Huh? - Wednesday, Jul 12, 23 @ 5:33 pm:
Sue- when the Feds say “Madigan was sure to line his own pockets” it appears to me that it is speculation on the part of the DA. Where is the evidence that Madigan took any money? So far, there doesn’t seem to be any thing that clearly states Madigan took a bribe.
If the Feds ultimately convict Madigan, and the conviction is up held on appeal, there is nothing for me to deny. I will accept the fact that Madigan was convicted of a crime.
Over the years, there has been a steady drum beat (ruiner’s mantra) that Madigan was corrupt. But there was never anything that clearly demonstrated that Madigan was engaged in illegal activities.
Even the ComEd case is tangential. People associated with Madigan are on trial. The case was that ComEd hired people associated with Madigan assuming that ComEd could somehow influence Madigan.
Where is the clear line directly connecting Madigan to a crime or took any money?
- Thomas Paine - Thursday, Jul 13, 23 @ 6:21 am:
The problem with the Solis deal in Chinatown is that it was Solis who arguably engaged in a quid pro quo, and not Madigan.
And I agree, the fed’s court filing reads more like a press release than a legal document. It is almost like they are trying to influence the jury pool.