Latest Post | Last 10 Posts | Archives
Previous Post: *** UPDATED x1 *** Vote by mail applications top 2 million here
Next Post: Drug sentencing reform is topic of Senate hearing
Posted in:
An Exelon official testified before a legislative committee on Tuesday that the utility entered a deferred prosecution agreement with federal prosecutors as a result of a nearly ten-year-long bribery scheme intended to influence House Speaker Michael Madigan, but said the utility didn’t know if Madigan was aware of the effort.
In the first substantive testimony before the House Special Investigating Committee regarding the ComEd bribery scandal that federal prosecutors revealed this summer, committee chairman state Rep. Chris Welch, D-Hillside, asked utility executive David Glockner a direct question.
“There’s nothing anywhere in the deferred prosecution agreement that establishes personal knowledge by Speaker Madigan, correct?” Welch asked.
“I would agree with that,” said Glockner, executive vice president of compliance and audit for Exelon, the parent company of ComEd.
State Rep. Deanne Mazzochi, R-Elmhurst, went a bit further.
“Is it fair to say that Commonwealth Edison paid over $1.3 million at least in part to influence Michael Madigan’s actions as speaker of the house?” Mazzochi asked.
“Yes,” Glockner said.
Mazzochi asked Glockner about a section in the DPA that stated that “Consultant 1,” identified as former City Club of Chicago President Jay Doherty, “had ‘every reason to believe’ that Individual A had spoken to Public Official A about the retention of Public Official A’s associates.”
“Is it reasonable to infer that Mr. Madigan had knowledge of the scheme from that, from ComEd’s perspective?” Mazzochi asked.
Glockner said he wasn’t in a position to comment on that inquiry.
“ComEd has acknowledged repeatedly through the agreement that it believed or intended to influence the speaker through its conduct. Whether it in fact … influenced the speaker, whether the speaker was aware of its intent to influence – those are questions that I’m not in a position to comment on,” Glockner said.
* Tribune…
Glockner hewed closely to the deferred prosecution agreement ComEd entered into in July with federal prosecutors, but avoided comment on whether the utility’s efforts had the intended effect on Madigan.
“ComEd acknowledges repeatedly through the agreement that it believed or it intended to influence the speaker through its conduct,” Glockner told the six-member special investigating committee. “Whether it, in fact, influenced the speaker, whether the speaker was aware of its intent to influence, those are questions I don’t think I’m in a position to comment on.” […]
In an opening statement, Durkin said that if Democrats set partisan interests aside, they would see there was sufficient evidence to support a charge that would send Madigan before a disciplinary committee.
“In order to discredit ComEd’s admissions, you would have to believe that Michael Madigan didn’t know what was going on around him,” Durkin said. “You know Michael Madigan. He’s not ignorant of what’s going on around him. He is not naive. And he is not easily surprised.”
* Finke…
Once Durkin was finished, Welch thanked him and said he looks forward to Durkin returning in the future and testifying under oath. Welch has suggested Durkin be called as a witness because he helped pass legislation that was beneficial to Commonwealth Edison. The legislation is mentioned in the deferred prosecution agreement.
* Sun-Times…
State House Speaker Mike Madigan’s former hand-picked alderman was named Tuesday as one of the powerful Southwest Side Democrat’s associates who was on ComEd’s payroll despite doing little or no work.
Testifying before the Illinois House committee investigating Madigan, David Glockner, ComEd’s executive vice president of compliance and audit, identified Frank Olivo as one of the people who received some of the $1.3 million that the utility paid to Madigan’s associates in what amounted to a ghost-payrolling scheme at a time when ComEd was seeking the speaker’s support for legislation.
Glockner declined to confirm whether the Frank Olivo he identified as Associate No. 2 in the utility company’s deferred prosecution agreement was the former 13th Ward alderman.
But a federal subpoena issued to Madigan’s office named Olivo as well — and tied him to Madigan’s 13th Ward.
* WTTW…
Democrats also questioned Glockner about whether ComEd hired lobbyists who were close to legislative leaders other than Madigan and whether Durkin had recommended any hires. The answer was yes.
The Democratic legislators on the committee also indicated they plan in the future to call Durkin as a witness, given his role negotiating the Future Energy Jobs Act (FEJA), an item referenced in the DPA as beneficial to ComEd and which passed during the latter portion of the bribery scheme.
* WBEZ has a lot of details…
Glockner, for the first time, publicly identified specific subcontracts ComEd had with Madigan allies for whom no work product could be identified, including Madigan operative Raymond Nice, former Chicago Ald. Michael Zalewski and Frank Olivo, though it was not clear whether he was referring to the ex-13th Ward alderman or his son of the same name. All were paid through the lobbying firm once owned by former ComEd lobbyist and City Club of Chicago head Jay Doherty, Glockner said. […]
In another new disclosure, Glockner identified that other no-work contracts to associates of Madigan were funneled through four Springfield lobbying firms owned by the speaker’s close friend, ComEd lobbyist Michael McClain; lobbyist Victor Reyes; former Madigan staffer Shaw Decremer; and ex-state Rep. John Bradley, D-Marion.
None of those individuals have been charged in connection with the federal investigation, and Glockner declined to give details about those particular arrangements. […]
And in one other new development, Glockner confirmed ComEd had received an email from a Madigan office assistant encouraging the company to place former McPier chief Juan Ochoa on ComEd’s board of directors. Ochoa was on the utility’s board from April 2019 until last April.
* And Mark Brown has seen enough…
A trio of Illinois House Democrats dug in their heels, buried their heads firmly in the sand and did their best Tuesday to ignore a litany of damning evidence against House Speaker Michael Madigan.
This was not a surprise. The three were named to an Illinois House Special Investigative Committee looking into Madigan’s dealings with Commonwealth Edison specifically for purposes of defending him.
The real question is how long the rest of their Democratic colleagues will continue with the charade.
Madigan needs to go.
posted by Rich Miller
Wednesday, Sep 30, 20 @ 2:44 am
Sorry, comments are closed at this time.
Previous Post: *** UPDATED x1 *** Vote by mail applications top 2 million here
Next Post: Drug sentencing reform is topic of Senate hearing
WordPress Mobile Edition available at alexking.org.
powered by WordPress.
Jay Doherty has a beautiful Irish tenor voice.
Have you ever heard him sing O Mikey boy?
Comment by Lucky Pierre Wednesday, Sep 30, 20 @ 7:56 am
Durkin made the decision to follow this path so we’ll now have to see how it plays out. It’s clear from what I saw yesterday that the Democratic members of the committee will do everything they can to slow walk this.
At the same time the Republicans could have chosen a different path. There are a number of Democrats who have called for Madigan to go. But those individuals weren’t in the room yesterday and the Republicans made the decision not to align themselves with those in the Democratic party that have a similar view on Madigan’s standing. So what we’re left with is political theater that doesn’t really accomplish anything.
Comment by Pundent Wednesday, Sep 30, 20 @ 8:33 am
The Bible says “He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone”
Comment by Jesus Wednesday, Sep 30, 20 @ 8:47 am
Speaker Welch has found his stride and shown he can go toe to toe with Durkin without being bullied.
Comment by Ok Wednesday, Sep 30, 20 @ 8:49 am
Being a Democrat and a White Sox fan, I had the House hearings on the IPad and the Sox on the TV so I might have missed some of the hearing highlights.
I did come away from my viewing thinking the Sox were looking real good and the Madigan/Pritzker wing of the Democratic Party was looking pretty bad.
Comment by Back to the Future Wednesday, Sep 30, 20 @ 8:49 am
Takeaways from this fiasco:
(1) Everyone was reminded Madigan’s moniker may appear in the DPA, but the DPA does not point to any actual wrongdoing by Madigan. ComEd exec clarified multiples times that ComEd doesn’t know if Madigan actually knew what McClan and others were doing.
(2) Madigan did recommend Ochoa. ComEd exec didn’t respond to who else may have recommended Ochoa. For all we know, multiple people recommended him or Madigan made the recommendation at the request of someone else.
(3) ComEd admitted it’s army of lobbyists and contractors weren’t supervised very well and they hired people from all caucuses, including Durkin. Not surprising. The question no one asked is whether ComEd hired individuals at request of other legislators in an attempt to influence those members, similar to Madigan.
Comment by waste of time Wednesday, Sep 30, 20 @ 8:51 am
I wish Wordslinger was here to opine on all of this. I miss him everyday but especially when news and political developments of this magnitude are breaking.
Comment by Colin O'Scopy Wednesday, Sep 30, 20 @ 8:53 am
=== Madigan needs to go.===
Mark Brown calls it, I’ve said Madigan should resign July 18th.
The theatre yesterday, however, did nothing to either end, and if you like theatre yesterday was for you.
Demmer needed to find 60 votes to make this work, Durkin is pushing this to help Wehrli and others win an election.
Where I don’t fully agree with Mark Brown is “Fire Madigan” hasn’t put any heat on HDems as there are more HDems now than ever, after $100 million and a movie… a movie, for cripes sake… to “get” Madigan.
The altruistic thought, and I agree, that Madigan is finished for a better Illinois isn’t rewarded as voters know Raunerites hurt Illinois purposely with their policies and votes in the GA and after those four years, the likes of Demmer leading to hurt Illinois’ most needy or vulnerable isn’t an option.
So we get activity, achieving very little.
Rich has done an incredible job covering this, this roundup shows this theatre is getting coverage, but the baked in “Fire Madigan” mindset is locked in, who exactly will Wehrli get “new” to this, as the national politics isn’t just sucking all the oxygen from other issues and campaigns, it’s sucking all the oxygen to a black hole at the bottom of the endless abyss kinda sucking where this “activity” is being covered, but 6th or 7th in line, and baked in to people’s perceptions.
Raunerites proved, they vote to hurt Illinois, unless they get policies to hurt Illinois.
Voters saw Madigan fight the fight to save Illinois from Rauner, even as they say in polling Madigan is 35+ points under water.
I think Madigan should resign.
This theatre is an activity not designed to achieve that end, nor is it focused on that by any of the 6 on the committee.
Comment by Oswego Willy Wednesday, Sep 30, 20 @ 9:03 am
My big takeaway is that after that dumpster fire of a debate last night, there are only a couple of hundred people following the ComEd story, and they’re all here reading and commenting on it.
The other question I have is whether Durkin can renew his petition in January when the new GA is seated and if so, will he?
Comment by Joe Bidenopolous Wednesday, Sep 30, 20 @ 9:31 am
Interesting that Welch wants Durkin to testify under oath, whose name is not mentioned in federal documents, but isn’t interested in hearing from anyone who was. Interesting. Can’t imagine why that might be.
Comment by Just Me 2 Wednesday, Sep 30, 20 @ 9:48 am
- Just Me 2 -
According to *your* logic, why didn’t Durkin just agree to be questioned and show what a farce not testifying is?
Your thought isn’t as clever as you think.
Beyond that, what attorney for any individual asked to testify would let their client do so.
They wouldn’t. So there’s that too.
Comment by Oswego Willy Wednesday, Sep 30, 20 @ 9:55 am
Here’s the long and the short of it.
ComEd admits they were trying to bribe Madigan to get favorable legislation passed. So far there is no evidence that Madigan did anything improper relating to the passage of the legislation.
He can recommend people for jobs, he can ask companies to take on his people - None of that is illegal. Recommending people for jobs is something that every legislator does. They have a First Amendment right to do it. If ComEd decided to take on these people without supervising what they were doing or ensuring that they were actually doing work - that is on them.
Politically this looks really bad, but I don’t think that what the Speaker is alleged to have done at this point does not constitute conduct unbecoming of a legislator let alone a crime.
Comment by Powdered Whig Wednesday, Sep 30, 20 @ 9:55 am
The HGOP made a tactical mistake not inviting the democratic members of the House to participate in this investigation that have called for the Speaker to resign. If they would have worked with the HGOP so much the better. If they refused Durkin could have said I tried to make this bi-partisan. Huge error in my opinion.
Comment by Nagidam Wednesday, Sep 30, 20 @ 9:58 am
===… made a tactical mistake not inviting the democratic members of the House to participate in this investigation that have called for the Speaker to resign. If they would have worked with the HGOP so much the better. If they refused Durkin could have said I tried to make this bi-partisan. Huge error in my opinion.===
This all day, every day.
Demmer deciding that his activity here on the committee instead of getting 60 (or very close to it) bipartisan members to call for resignation is far better than trying to make activity here to only help achieve Wehrli get re-elected, if that happens.
Can’t concur more, that “choice” would achieve so much more, but here we are.
Comment by Oswego Willy Wednesday, Sep 30, 20 @ 10:00 am
=== Politically this looks really bad, but I don’t think that what the Speaker is alleged to have done at this point does not constitute conduct unbecoming of a legislator let alone a crime. ===
Oof. Need to proofread what I write. I meant to say that at this point, it doesn’t look like conduct unbecoming of a legislator let alone a crime.
Comment by Powdered Whig Wednesday, Sep 30, 20 @ 10:03 am
Madigan didn’t give a rat’s a** about the citizens or the financial health of the State in his fight against Governor Rauner so let’s put that lie to rest. It is obvious with the debt that the State of Illinois is in that Madigan has never cared about the financial well being of the State and is about his own power. And his power shows no bounds as just like a Mafia head his minions know what they are expected to do to keep him in power and to make sure none of their wrong doings (done for Madigan’s benefit and with his blessing) will stain the their Leader. He has turned a blind eye to corruption and sexual harassments among his minions until those issues bit him in the a**.
Comment by Arock Wednesday, Sep 30, 20 @ 10:18 am
===… about the citizens or the financial health of the State in his fight against Governor Rauner so let’s put that===
… LOL, and yet that’s exactly what transpired and to this day… defeating Rauner is seen as saving Illinois… from a governor who refused to sign budgets, and was willing to hurt the most vulnerable to take down Labor.
Never had Madigan had so many groups coalesce around him with that goal, HDems were rewarded with the largest majority in the tenure of Madigan being a Speaker.
What, you saying Rauner was the savior?
By nearly every measure, Illinois was worse off Rauner as Governor.
You may not like it, or call it a “lie”, but…
Comment by Oswego Willy Wednesday, Sep 30, 20 @ 10:22 am
Looking forward to the demise of Madigan…how many other people will go down with him.? Stay tuned…
Comment by Loop Lady Wednesday, Sep 30, 20 @ 10:30 am
It looks to me that this is worse for Durkin than Madigan. Everybody already dislikes Mike Madigan. Durkin is a respected leader. And yes, Madigan should resign. But did we really need the Com Ed debacle to make us think that? He should have passed the torch at the end of 2018.
Comment by Ducky LaMoore Wednesday, Sep 30, 20 @ 10:32 am
=Looking forward to the demise of Madigan…how many other people will go down with him.?=
I know, feels like 2018 all over again doesn’t it?
Comment by Pundent Wednesday, Sep 30, 20 @ 10:32 am
=== Looking forward to the demise of Madigan ===
Isn’t that a sad thing to be looking forward to?
Comment by Powdered Whig Wednesday, Sep 30, 20 @ 10:41 am
Oswego Willy pretty much nails it.
2018 was a choice between Madigan and Rauner, the voters chose Madigan overwhelmingly.
2020 is a choice between Madigan and Trump, and once again it is not looking good for Republicans.
Elections have consequences. If the GOP hopes to ouster Madigan, they are going to have to serve up something better. If they hope to sway Democrats, they are going to have to do better than Ken Dunkin. And if they hope to claim the moral high ground, they are going to have to pick a better battlefield than ComEd.
The other option, which I would recommend to Republicans and anti-Party leftists, is to do nothing. Do what Madigan did with George Ryan, and allow the federal prosecution to run its course. If they are right, they will be rid of Madigan much faster than any partisan machinations could hope to muster.
Comment by Thomas Paine Wednesday, Sep 30, 20 @ 10:48 am
Hot take that this is worse for Durkin than Madigan.
Comment of the year
Comment by Lucky Pierre Wednesday, Sep 30, 20 @ 10:51 am
=It looks to me that this is worse for Durkin than Madigan.=
What a strange thing to say. The Madigan-ites had better wake up to the fact that this did not go well for the Speaker and he’s gonna start to feel real heat from the DOJ soon based on what I learned from the hearing yesterday. Trying to deflect this onto Durkin is laughable at best.
Comment by Colin O'Scopy Wednesday, Sep 30, 20 @ 10:52 am
===Trying to deflect this onto Durkin===
What is the goal of this exercise, what is the hope to be achieved?
According to the Arroyo Rule, indictment means removal. That’s not changing. Madigan in trouble will always *be* in the terms of the GA and the reality of that Arroyo Rule.
That all said, how much *lower* can MJM’s approval go, and further, how many more seats are Raunerites gonna lose anyway?
Again, what is the goal of this exercise, what is the hope to be achieved? There’s no 60, bad press is there but eclipsed, Demmer woulda been better getting 60 for Durkin if the goal is the removal of Madigan for Durkin.
Comment by Oswego Willy Wednesday, Sep 30, 20 @ 10:59 am
Shouldn’t it be on the Democrats to explain their votes for not subpoenaing the tainted Speaker and voting to remove him?
As far as OW is concerned the buck stops with Donald Segretti
Comment by Lucky Pierre Wednesday, Sep 30, 20 @ 11:13 am
” looking forward to the demise of Madigan”
Don’t hold your breath!
Comment by Drake Mallard Wednesday, Sep 30, 20 @ 11:13 am
=Trying to deflect this onto Durkin is laughable at best.=
It depends on what “this” is. It could have been an attempt to consolidate support around Madigan’s removal by aligning with like minded Democrats. But that doesn’t seem to be the goal. Instead we’re in search of a smoking gun that shows that Madigan extracted something in exchange for passing a bill on behalf of ComEd. But all that has done is brought attention to the “intense involvement” of Rauner and Durkin and the mountains that they had to move to get this bill through.
So once again we see a Republican party that can’t get out of it’s own way, is out maneuvered by Madigan and his supporters, and is left squandering another opportunity. And I say all of that as someone that would like nothing more than to see Madigan leave.
Comment by Pundent Wednesday, Sep 30, 20 @ 11:15 am
Yep yesterday was certainly another red letter day for the Democrats and the walls are closing in on Leader Durkin
Tom Demmer and the Democrats he controls really looked terrible yesterday
Comment by Lucky Pierre Wednesday, Sep 30, 20 @ 11:25 am
It still really grinds my gears that JB did not try to push Madigan out as chairman of the party after he trounced Rauner in 2018. Madigan isn’t going to go voluntarily and his mushrooms seem perfectly willing to look like fools in order to defend him. After seeing this spectacle I doubt that MJM would resign even if he were charged by the feds. It would be a whole lot easier for Illinois dems to defend themselves if JB started a hostile takeover at DPI.
Comment by Lester Holt’s Mustache Wednesday, Sep 30, 20 @ 12:09 pm
It is obvious with the debt that the State of Illinois is in that Madigan has never cared about the financial well being of the State and is about his own power.
The plan all along has been a Federal bailout of the mistakes the Speaker and his supporters have left Illinois citizens saddled with for the next few decades.
Now that they total control of Illinois state government, as well as the largest city and county they have no idea how to clean up their own mess.
Comment by Lucky Pierre Wednesday, Sep 30, 20 @ 12:18 pm
Madigan needs to go- said me 10 years ago.
This isn’t going to make it happen.
= Democrats also questioned Glockner about whether ComEd hired lobbyists who were close to legislative leaders other than Madigan and whether Durkin had recommended any hires. The answer was yes.=
Durkin forgot the fact that the scary dog you keep on a leash to scare people could turn around and bite you. He probably didn’t do anything illegal, but all that Welch has to do is put a little stink on him and now he has.
Alsio, ComEd didn’t state that they were trying to brine Madigan, the statement is they tried to influence him. Not the same thing and not illegal. Bribing people around Madigan is illegal and so is accepting those bribes.
Creating that climate, as Madigan has, is the real issue and exactly why he needs to go.
Comment by JS Mill Wednesday, Sep 30, 20 @ 12:20 pm
OW is correct. MJM should have resigned in July or sooner.
The longer he stays, the more heat will be on Individuals who have been very loyal to him.
Comment by low level Wednesday, Sep 30, 20 @ 1:09 pm
=== It still really grinds my gears that JB did not try to push Madigan out as chairman of the party after he trounced Rauner in 2018. Madigan isn’t going to go voluntarily and his mushrooms seem perfectly willing to look like fools in order to defend him. After seeing this spectacle I doubt that MJM would resign even if he were charged by the feds. It would be a whole lot easier for Illinois dems to defend themselves if JB started a hostile takeover at DPI. ===
1. And how exactly would trying to push Madigan out as Chair of DPI have helped JB in his role as Governor trying to move his agenda through the legislature? Maybe give JB some credit that he has enough political sense to know which battles are worth fighting and which ones aren’t.
2. It doesn’t seem like Democrats are doing too bad at not only defending themselves, but going on the offensive to take more Republican seats. Your argument isn’t reflected in reality.
Comment by Powdered Whig Wednesday, Sep 30, 20 @ 1:12 pm
===JB did not try to push Madigan out===
Yes, because that has ALWAYS worked before.
Comment by Rich Miller Wednesday, Sep 30, 20 @ 1:17 pm
If there is no law against recommending someone for a job, what is this whole hearing really about?
Comment by Mama Wednesday, Sep 30, 20 @ 2:37 pm
=== If there is no law against recommending someone for a job, what is this whole hearing really about? ===
Its about scoring cheap political points. They are taking what was in the ComEd Deferred Prosecution Agreement and pinning all of those misdeeds on him even though there is no evidence that he actually did anything wrong.
Comment by Powdered Whig Wednesday, Sep 30, 20 @ 3:34 pm
===the mistakes the Speaker and his supporters have left Illinois citizens===
Like life-long Democrats Edgar and Thompson?
Comment by Jibba Wednesday, Sep 30, 20 @ 9:28 pm