* Tribune…

The corruption charges against former House Speaker Michael Madigan are in many ways tethered to his longtime confidant, Michael McClain, a self-described “agent” of the speaker who was captured on FBI wiretaps pushing contract and job requests that he said came directly from Madigan himself.

On Wednesday, however, Madigan’s attorneys made their most aggressive attempts yet to distance the former Democratic leader from his co-defendant, strongly implying in a lengthy cross-examination of a key government witness that McClain used his relationship with the speaker to push his own, sometimes strange agenda.

In questioning former ComEd executive and government cooperator Fidel Marquez, Madigan attorney Tom Breen sought to portray McClain’s repeated name-dropping of the powerful speaker in emails and recorded conversations — often using flimsy code names such as “Himself” or “our Friend” — as a scare tactic to get things done.

Breen also attempted to ridicule the notion that Madigan, then the state’s most powerful politician, would have been concerned with nitpicky requests for ComEd, like giving more billable hours to a clout-heavy law firm or fulfilling recommendations for low-level jobs and summer internships.

* Courthouse News reporter Dave Byrnes…

* Sun-Times…

“Did you really believe that Michael Madigan, at dinner, was telling Michael McClain — kind of doing a psychological evaluation of you that there’s ‘two Fidels’ — do you really believe that conversation took place?” attorney Tom Breen demanded.

Marquez assured him that he did, but Breen had sent his own message. He and a colleague spent their day trying to plant doubt in jurors’ minds about the weeklong testimony from Marquez, who hopes to avoid prison by working with the FBI. His testimony against McClain and Madigan, Illinois’ once-powerful House speaker who resigned in 2021, has spanned five days.

The defense attorneys asked Marquez Wednesday about a false answer he gave while trying to buy a gun, about legal trouble in his divorce, and about his deal with prosecutors that led him to secretly record McClain and three other colleagues. Marquez testified he couldn’t “recollect” whether the FBI had offered him anything when they first approached him.

“You’re telling us that the FBI did not give you any consideration — any inducement — to set up your four friends?” Breen pressed at one point, raising his voice and gesturing toward Marquez.

“What I said was, ‘I don’t recall,’” Marquez insisted.

* Capitol News Illinois…

Cross-examination also dug into Marquez’s contentious divorce.

“Is it not a fact that you attempted to hide from your wife and the court $400,000 in assets you had?” Cotter asked about Marquez’s 2014 divorce court battle.

Marquez acknowledged that he had, and in later questioning from Breen, admitted that he considered transferring the money to his then-girlfriend but didn’t go through with it. Because he “returned the money,” Marquez said he didn’t think to mention the episode to prosecutors. It ultimately came out during a dramatic moment during his cross-examination in last year’s ComEd trial, though the judge quickly shut down that attorney’s line of questioning.

Breen also questioned Marquez about a 2022 incident in which he was found in civil contempt of court for refusing to give $23,000 worth of stock to his ex-wife.

“You were threatened, as a matter of fact, with jail time if you did not transfer certain stock or assets,” Breen said. “And when you’re threatened with jail you comply.”

* More…

* ABC Chicago | Defense cross-examines star witness in former IL speaker trial: Madigan’s attorneys are cross-examining Fidel Marquez Wednesday. “You agreed to wear wires on your ComEd family?” one attorney asked. Marquez said, “yes.” “So you agreed to wear a wire, against your four friends, and you’re telling us the FBI didn’t give you any inducement to set them up?” the attorney asked. “I got a sense that this was not good,” Marquez said.