Latest Post | Last 10 Posts | Archives
Previous Post: Petition filing day coverage roundup
Next Post: AARP Illinois Names New State Director
Posted in:
* Tribune, March 2…
Consulting funds flowing from AT&T to a lobbyist with deep ties to then-House Speaker Michael Madigan and eventually to a former state representative are at the center of a federal investigation into the telephone giant’s lobbying practices in Springfield, the Tribune has learned.
Last month, AT&T disclosed in a regulatory filing that federal prosecutors had notified them they were considering filing criminal charges against its Illinois subsidiary, formally known as Illinois Bell Telephone Co. LLC, involving “a single, nine-month consulting contract in 2017″ worth $22,500.
The Tribune reported that the feds were looking into $22,500 in AT&T money passed through to former state Rep. Edward Acevedo, who was not registered as an AT&T lobbyist at the time and whose work product was questioned.
* Well, the Tribune reporters did some arithmetic and found a big golden nugget in the recent Madigan/McClain indictment…
Though the indictment specifically used the plural, “businesses,” only one company, Commonwealth Edison, has so far been named as having participated in that alleged conduct.
Ninety-five pages later, the indictment ends with two forfeiture allegations, representing money prosecutors will seek to collect as ill-gotten gains from Madigan and his co-defendant, Michael McClain, in the event of a conviction.
The first forfeiture seeks funds that “include but are not limited to approximately $2,850,337.” The second forfeiture is slightly lower, pegged at $2,827,837.
The difference between the numbers? $22,500.
That figure may seem insignificant, but it happens to be the exact amount of a consulting contract that AT&T has acknowledged is under scrutiny by the U.S. attorney’s office as part of the investigation into Madigan’s political operation.
Click here for the indictment and read about it yourself.
posted by Rich Miller
Tuesday, Mar 8, 22 @ 11:35 am
Sorry, comments are closed at this time.
Previous Post: Petition filing day coverage roundup
Next Post: AARP Illinois Names New State Director
WordPress Mobile Edition available at alexking.org.
powered by WordPress.
There is very specific and high mens rea in the federal bribery statute. The feds know they have to have specific evidence of corrupt intent. Just because Acevedo was connected to Madigan is not evidence of corrupt intent.
Comment by Three Dimensional Checkers Tuesday, Mar 8, 22 @ 11:46 am
Which is probably why the indictment referenced the state law version of bribery.
Comment by Hannibal Lecter Tuesday, Mar 8, 22 @ 11:57 am
They have two forfeiture allegations, and assuming the Tribune reporting is accurate, does this mean that the prosecutors would have to prove the $22,500 was part of the scheme to bribe Madigan?
There is one forfeiture seeking restitution for ComEd bribes, assuming the feds prove their charges. Seems to me like AT&T could also be on-trial if the feds attempt to prove whether that $22,500 was a bribe. If the feds prove that, wouldn’t that open up AT&T to some additional charges?
Comment by 47th Ward Tuesday, Mar 8, 22 @ 12:01 pm
May forfeiture orders be paid for with campaign funds?
Comment by Nitemayor Wednesday, Mar 9, 22 @ 6:49 am