* Jon Seidel…
The sentencings of four people convicted of a lengthy conspiracy to bribe then-Illinois House Speaker Michael Madigan for ComEd will not go forward as planned next month, but a judge declined Monday to put all proceedings on hold as defense attorneys hoped.
Meanwhile, a defense attorney for Madigan’s co-defendant said he will be making a similar request to stay proceedings in Madigan’s case, which is set for trial in less than four months.
The developments come in the wake of the Supreme Court’s decision to take up a corruption case out of Northwest Indiana, in which questions revolve around a law at play in the ComEd and Madigan cases.
Defense attorneys say the Supreme Court’s decision in the Indiana case could prove “fatal” to the verdict last May against the ComEd bribery defendants: Madigan confidant Michael McClain, ex-ComEd CEO Anne Pramaggiore, former ComEd lobbyist John Hooker and onetime City Club President Jay Doherty. […]
U.S. District Judge Manish Shah handled questions in the ComEd case as emergency judge Monday. He declined to enter a stay of proceedings but told attorneys the sentencing dates for the four defendants, which had been set for January, weren’t going to work.
Go read the rest.
- Candy Dogood - Monday, Dec 18, 23 @ 12:26 pm:
Madigan’s 81. What’s he expression? Justice delayed is justice denied?
- ArchPundit - Monday, Dec 18, 23 @ 12:34 pm:
Candy,
It’s worse than that–they may define what he was accused of doing as legal.
- Anyone Remember - Monday, Dec 18, 23 @ 12:38 pm:
While I disagree with SCOTUS, they have in a multi-generational bi-partisan manner continued to chip away at the definition of “public corruption” going back to Otto Kerner. ===Should=== that trend continue, the 4’s convictions will be overturned, and Madigan may never go on trial.
- DuPage Saint - Monday, Dec 18, 23 @ 12:46 pm:
Since the Supreme Court overturned the bribery charges of the Virginia governor I will not be surprised if Madigan never goes to trial and if Burke convicted it gets overturned too. Really if Blago wasn’t so obnoxious he might have had a shot
- Please - Monday, Dec 18, 23 @ 12:59 pm:
That the former Speaker was running an organized crime syndicate under the Dome was fairly open knowledge. ComEd is but one company, they were shaking down dozens, if not hundreds, in the same fashion.
As alarming as the behavior itself is the reality that so many enablers still do not understand that it was wrong.
The ridiculous notion that the former Speaker was playing chess while everyone else was playing checkers is an absurd defense of making a mockery of Democracy. Low character grifters one and all.
- The647 - Monday, Dec 18, 23 @ 1:34 pm:
This is a nothing ruling. The presiding judge wasn’t even there. Of course the substitute just went with a continuance.
- Anyone Remember - Monday, Dec 18, 23 @ 1:36 pm:
“… is an absurd defense of making a mockery of Democracy.”
When I would say Madigan played 3-D chess well enough to beat Mr. Spock, was talking about winning elections. With a GOP drawn map, he won 4 out of 5 elections, and the one he lost was the Newtwave.
- Ryder - Monday, Dec 18, 23 @ 1:51 pm:
It’s right in front of us. We all should see it. Checkmate.
- Larry Bowa Jr. - Monday, Dec 18, 23 @ 1:53 pm:
“Low character grifters one and all.”
Surprising amount of commenters here were upset that Ed’s on trial for shaking down a Burger King, like that’s something that happens to you by accident. I guess Anne doesn’t deserve the embarrassment of her husband getting caught for what everyone always knew he was up to.
- Annon'in - Monday, Dec 18, 23 @ 1:55 pm:
This development not surprising. There have been conflicting decisions on the topic for some time. A Supreme Court decision to resolive the conflict was certain to come. Too bad all the breathless reporting did not share this earlier, but we do live in something of a news dessert on the topic.
- PolOp - Monday, Dec 18, 23 @ 2:02 pm:
Please,
Seems like the former Speaker lives rent free in your head. Or maybe you’re being facetious, I can’t tell. Either way, your comment is as much entertaining as it is anti-democratic. Justice, it seems, is whatever you say it is, not our current system (as flawed as it may be). God bless us all if you ever become an elected official.
- New Day - Monday, Dec 18, 23 @ 2:20 pm:
“This is a nothing ruling. The presiding judge wasn’t even there. Of course the substitute just went with a continuance.”
I don’t agree with the Supreme Court but the potential for them to define corruption away is very, very real. If they follow the pattern they established in the McDonnell case, these defendants, all of whom should be headed to the pokey, will all walk free. This is anything but “no big deal.”
- Moe Berg - Monday, Dec 18, 23 @ 2:20 pm:
===running an organized crime syndicate===
No. No he wasn’t. Organized crime syndicates employ violence and the threat thereof to achieve their ends. Don’t dishonor the victims of the mafia and cartels by suggesting equivalence with a non-violent political figure.
I understand the temptation to analogize to the mob, especially because Mike McClain, regrettably and foolishly, was prone to using their argot. And, Madigan ran a hierarchical organization. But, corporations, school districts, and sports teams are hierarchical. That’s generally how organizations work - with a chain of command.
As to the main point of the post: Ultimately Clarence Thomas, who is well documented (the latest Pro Publica story about it published only today) to have been lavished with expensive gifts and loans from right wing billionaires (with interests before the court), will be one of the US Supreme Court justices deciding what constitutes public corruption.
- Tony T. - Monday, Dec 18, 23 @ 2:45 pm:
There’s no doubt that entire ComEd-Madigan episode is filled unseemly and unethical behavior. The question has always been whether or not it’s illegal when viewed through the prism of the Supreme Court’s decision in McDonnell case, in which they unanimously threw out the conviction of a governor who accepted $135,000 in “gifts” from a campaign contributor who was seeking favorable government action. The breadth of the ComEd case is broader, but the benefit derived by McDonnell was more direct and blatant.
Probably makes sense to slow things down and see of the supremes want to clarify any ambiguity. No reason to hold sentencing and new trials if the Supreme Court blows up the legal underpinnings of the prosecution a few months from now.
- The647 - Monday, Dec 18, 23 @ 3:12 pm:
–New Day
I think you misunderstood my point. The article says that the substitute judge simply rescheduled sentencing and “declined to enter a stay of proceedings.” The nothing decision I referred to is the court order delaying sentencing which is what I took Seidel’s article to be about. I think that any substitute judge in a similar situation would do the same. When Leinenweber returns and decides on the stay that is the decision that will matter, at least for the ComEd4. I was also not speaking about the Supreme’s decision to take up the NWI case, the article didn’t really discuss that case other than telling me that the defense and State disagreed about its importance.
- Huh? - Monday, Dec 18, 23 @ 3:15 pm:
“Ed’s on trial for shaking down a Burger King”
I had a college engineering professor tell not to get involved with something like a franchise operation, because I’d things go wrong, we would end up bankrupt. However, getting involved with a mega operation, if things go wrong, we would be hired to solve the problem.
Shaking down a burger king is small time.
- Please - Monday, Dec 18, 23 @ 3:19 pm:
Moe Berg - minus the murder, the organized crime characteristics are in fact a fair comparison.
That it hits a little too close to home for you perhaps calls for a little personal reflection. As with Trump, those who participated in, or enabled the grift are generally tardy in acknowledging its’ existence.
- Rich Miller - Monday, Dec 18, 23 @ 3:36 pm:
===Shaking down a burger king is small time===
Not when the franchise owner has that many locations. Look at it as a first step.
- PolOp - Monday, Dec 18, 23 @ 3:54 pm:
===Minus the murder===
That’s a big LOL for me there, Please. Minus the murder, rape, drug dealing, human trafficking, etc., they’re the same.
There are certainly better analogies for you to come up with, but please, keep doubling down by minimizing murder, etc. Perhaps a little self-reflection is needed on your end as well. I hope you find it in time to bring some holiday cheer to those around you.
- Rich Miller - Monday, Dec 18, 23 @ 4:09 pm:
===a fair comparison===
Back when I had interns, their first assignment was to watch Godfather I and II and Goodfellas. It was the quickest way to understand the mindset.
The Cook County Democratic Party was organized along the same lines as the historical mafia. I even wrote some newspaper columns about it. They essentially ran a protection racket, which they admitted to and which I wrote about dozens and dozens of times. And sometimes, like with the Outfit, people and organizations had to purchase protection from them because they said so.
They wouldn’t physically torch your restaurant, of course, but they might put you out of business or hurt it. This was the way things were done for decades.
I mean, none of this was a secret. Whether all of it was illegal or not will ultimately be decided by the US Supreme Court.
- Moe Berg - Monday, Dec 18, 23 @ 4:15 pm:
@PolOp: my thoughts as well. Thank you.
@Please: I don’t share your Manichean view. The world I live in is full-color, not black and white, filled with complexity and complicated people/institutions.
Madigan is neither a saint nor an arch-villain. Casting him as either is, frankly, boring.
- Just a guy - Monday, Dec 18, 23 @ 6:50 pm:
Like the great and wise George Carlin said so well: “It’s a Big Club…and you ain’t in it.”
- Sycophantic Averse - Monday, Dec 18, 23 @ 7:29 pm:
The FBI testified at trial they thought that Madigan operated like an Outfit boss. The fact he used a middle man was the central tenet of the conspiracy charge. The lead Assistant US Attorney was also the lead on Family Secrets which took down the actual Outfit. It isn’t an unfair comparison.
- Dotnonymous x - Monday, Dec 18, 23 @ 8:31 pm:
Politics includes the art of getting away with it…?
Whether all of it was illegal or not will ultimately be decided by the US Supreme Court…if it isn’t already decided?
- Keyrock - Monday, Dec 18, 23 @ 11:57 pm:
Not only was the Cook County Democratic Party organized like the mafia; at the time it was organized, the mafia was one of its key constituents. That continued until the time of Operation Gambat in the early ‘90’s.