Latest Post | Last 10 Posts | Archives
Previous Post: Question of the day
Posted in:
* WGN…
Michael Madigan’s legendary control of the Illinois House was a significant topic of discussion Wednesday in his ongoing corruption trial. […]
Wednesday, Oct. 30, was Day 2 of testimony from lobbyist Will Cousineau, who worked for the now-former Illinois Speaker of the House Madigan. Cousineau testified how the 82-year-old would secretly impose his will on legislation with the help of trusted lieutenants like McClain.
“The goal is to make as many people happy as possible,” Madigan said on a private conference call on Dec. 9, 2018, with top advisors, including Cousineau.
“Why did you continue to participate in these meetings?” Assistant US Attorney Julia Schwartz asked Cousineau on the witness stand. The Madigan staffer-turned-lobbyist was no longer on the Speaker’s payroll during the December 2018 strategy session.
“I worked for the Speaker for 18 years,” Cousineau replied. “I just wanted to keep helping.”
* Sun-Times…
The federal judge presiding over the corruption trial of former Illinois House Speaker Michael J. Madigan agreed to toss a small — but potentially key — piece of testimony Wednesday that put Madigan’s co-defendant in the room with him during discussion of a 2016 ComEd bill.
It’s a limited victory for Michael McClain, the longtime ComEd lobbyist who was also known as Madigan’s messenger around the Illinois State Capitol. But it likely did little damage to the case brought by prosecutors, who seemed to then fend off another attack by defense attorneys later in the morning. […]
The evidence tossed by the judge was delivered by former longtime Madigan aide Will Cousineau, who returned to the witness stand Wednesday. He discussed his role in efforts to pass the Future Energy Jobs Act late in 2016. […]
The bill ultimately passed. But McClain attorney Patrick Cotter seized on Cousineau’s lack of recall, arguing in court that U.S. District Judge John Blakey should toss the testimony. Blakey wound up having Cousineau clarify his answers without jurors present.
* Tribune…
Toward the end of the day Wednesday, Cousineau’s testimony turned to his assistance on the state’s massive gambling overhaul, which had been attempted many times before but been tabled by the speaker. This time, Madigan had given a green light to talks and named Rita as sponsor of the bill — an indication that it had his backing.
Through a series of text messages and wiretapped calls, prosecutors portrayed for the jury how Cousineau and McClain played outsized roles in the shaping of the important legislation, even though neither of them worked for the speaker’s office in any official capacity.
Cousineau testified he participated in a May 2018 meeting with McClain, Rita, and others regarding the gaming bill at the now-shuttered Sangamo Club in Springfield.
In text message conversation later that month, McClain and Cousineau update each other on the bill’s status in committee and where Madigan stood.
“Bob (Rita)’s analysis after talking to some members is that games were being played on the vote,” McClain wrote to Cousineau. “We are moving forward on the hearings. … I have had no one whisper in my ear and so I think will just stay on the program.”
And before trial broke for the day, Cousineau began testifying about working together with McClain on gambling legislation in the spring of 2018 – more than a year after McClain had officially retired from lobbying. Asked what business McClain had negotiating gambling bills without being a registered lobbyist, Cousineau said he believed McClain was involved at Madigan’s request.
At Mapes’ trial last summer, state Rep. Bob Rita, D-Blue Island, testified that in 2013, Madigan told him that he’d be taking over as the caucus’ lead sponsor and negotiator on all gambling issues. As Rita was leaving the speaker’s office, he said McClain was standing on the other side of the door and Madigan told him, “He will guide you.”
Rita, who began testimony in the current trial late last week, did not return to the witness stand on Monday and his absence has not been explained since.
* More…
* ABC Chicago | Defense attorneys argue jury being unfairly tainted: For nearly an hour, defense attorneys argued that the jury was being unfairly tainted, as the government tried to paint a picture of an all-powerful speaker, who could withhold campaign contributions to specific House members if they did not vote a certain way. This came as prosecutors tried to convince jurors that Madigan, through McClain, solicited bribes, along with no-work jobs and contracts from ComEd and others in exchange for favorable legislation.
posted by Isabel Miller
Thursday, Oct 31, 24 @ 9:24 am
Previous Post: Question of the day
WordPress Mobile Edition available at alexking.org.
powered by WordPress.
I remember the days when Madigan, McClain and Cousineau were considered the capitol’s 3D chess masters while everyone else was just a rube. It all looks different now.
Comment by Carpe GM Thursday, Oct 31, 24 @ 9:34 am
Whenever I see Madigan’s name, the first thing I think of the kids who didn’t get into U of I because of his favors dole-out. It may not have been criminal but it’s an example of the real damage he did to innocent people’s lives. All that corruption, all those out of work people who never had a fair chance at government jobs, all the increased taxes to pay for it, and so many just laughed it off, even respected “the master” and his “no phone” mob tactics.
Comment by lake county democrat Thursday, Oct 31, 24 @ 9:47 am
The government seems to be taking a long time to explain what the house speaker’s job is. Yes, he can kill a bill or move it forward. The was elected by a majority of house members to do just that.
Comment by Friendly Bob Adams Thursday, Oct 31, 24 @ 9:50 am
“he said McClain was standing on the other side of the door and Madigan told him, “He will guide you”
Besides seemingly being crooked; this testimony is just plain creepy. Perfect for Haloween
Comment by Donnie Elgin Thursday, Oct 31, 24 @ 9:51 am
I’m have mixed feelings about seeing so many of these Madigan people having their lives ruined. (Remember Shaw?)
On one hand I hate to see anyone in pain, and the impact on their families must be unfortunate. But on the other, they dished out misery and relished their superiority for so long.
Comment by Just Me 2 Thursday, Oct 31, 24 @ 10:00 am
“testified how the 82-year-old would secretly impose his will on legislation”
Innuendo like this isn’t indicative of a particularly strong case. It was no secret whatsoever that the Speaker was afforded power and eagerly wielded it.
Comment by AlfondoGonz Thursday, Oct 31, 24 @ 10:13 am
- (Remember Shaw?) -
You mean the guy that was a jerk to campaign staffers and to this day has a laundry list of paying clients for his lobbying biz?
Poor guy, some folks just have it awful.
Comment by Excitable Boy Thursday, Oct 31, 24 @ 10:57 am