Madigan’s voice heard for first time on recordings played at ‘ComEd Four’ trial
- Oops!Something went wrong.Please try again later.
Despite nearly four decades at the helm of Illinois politics, ex-House Speaker Michael Madigan’s voice was rarely heard publicly, outside of an occasional news conference or speech on the House floor.
But Madigan’s voice echoed through a Chicago federal courtroom on Thursday as prosecutors played a series of undercover recordings showing how the then-powerful speaker muscled out one of his longtime allies, Lou Lang, to stave off a potentially new sexual harassment scandal.
“I think this guy is going to be a continuing problem,” Madigan told his longtime confidant, Michael McClain, on one November 2018 call, which was being secretly recorded by the FBI. “If you think I’m wrong tell me I’m wrong but I don’t see how (Lang) continues now.”
In a later call, McClain told Madigan that Lang didn’t seem to be getting the message, and asked, “When do you want me to call Lang and just lower the boom on him? Because he’s not getting it.”
“Sooner rather than later,” Madigan replied.
Less than a week later, the message had been delivered. “Lang was here, and he told me he’s going to bow out sometime before the end of the calendar year,” Madigan told McClain on a call from Nov. 13, 2018. “Good, yeah,” McClain replied.
Listen to the audio:
The decision to boot Lang, a longtime Madigan ally who’d served as his deputy majority leader, due to unsubstantiated #MeToo allegations marked the first bit of political intrigue at the ongoing trial of the so-called ComEd Four.
The recordings were the first of more than a hundred wiretapped calls and conversations expected to be played by prosecutors during the trial, which wrapped up its first week on Thursday.
Prosecutors played the recordings to reinforce to the jury that Madigan called the shots in Springfield and was consumed with staying in power above all else. The recordings also buttressed allegations that McClain acted as an “agent” for the famously reclusive speaker, delivering messages and completing “assignments” for his boss even after McClain’s retirement from lobbying in 2016.
“My client is the speaker,” McClain said on a recorded call with another lobbyist in 2018, saying his actual clients such as ComEd and Walgreens took a back seat. “Once a lobbyist comes to peace that that’s their client, it’s a lot easier. ... The one person you care about is Mike Madigan.”
On trial are McClain, 75, an ex-ComEd lobbyist; former ComEd CEO Anne Pramaggiore, 64; ex-ComEd lobbyist John Hooker, 73; and Jay Doherty, 69, a lobbyist and consultant who formerly led the City Club of Chicago. All four have pleaded not guilty to bribery conspiracy and other charges alleging they covered up illegal payments on ComEd’s books.
The indictment in the case alleged ComEd poured $1.3 million into payments funneled to ghost “subcontractors” who were actually Madigan’s cronies, put a Madigan-backed person on the ComEd board, and gave coveted internships to families in his 13th Ward, all part of an elaborate scheme to keep the speaker happy.
And prosecutors contend it worked. Over the eight years of the scheme, Madigan helped ComEd win three lucrative pieces of legislation, including the “Smart Grid” bill in 2011 and another bill in 2016 that extended the life of two of the company’s nuclear plants.
The defendants’ attorneys have all contended that the so-called scheme was nothing more than legal lobbying, part of the state’s high-stakes, often-messy politics where myriad interest groups and stakeholders compete for access to lawmakers.
Madigan, meanwhile, has pleaded not guilty to a separate racketeering indictment accusing him of an array of corrupt schemes, including the ComEd bribery plot. McClain is also charged in that case, which is scheduled to go to trial in April 2024.
Before the recordings of Madigan were played for the jury, Lang took the witness stand to describe how he was forced to step down after 32 years in the General Assembly due to another potential chapter in a #MeToo scandal that had threatened Madigan’s grip on power.
In May 2018, marijuana advocate named Maryann Loncar had held a news conference accusing Lang of years of verbal abuse, “inappropriate behavior,” and sexual harassment — only one day after he had successfully championed approval of the Equal Rights Amendment.
Calling the allegations “absurd,” Lang voluntarily gave up his leadership position and asked for an investigation by the legislative inspector general. He declared himself “vindicated” four months later when the IG concluded the “preponderance of the evidence does not support Loncar’s allegations” of misconduct and closed the matter.
But by that November, word began circulating that another woman was going to come forward with other accusations of wrongdoing if Lang ever regained his leadership post, according to Lang’s testimony.
On Nov. 8, 2018, Lang took a call from McClain. “I just think it’s in your best interest to leave while you’re strong and not face all that, if you’re still a member,” McClain said on the call, which was played for the jury Thursday. “This is no longer me talking, I’m an agent.”
McClain said on the call that the concern came from “someone who cares deeply about you (and) thinks you ought to move on.”
Lang clearly understood that “someone” was Madigan.
“I appreciate you leveling with me,” Lang said, asking for a week to mull it over. “I wouldn’t do anything to damage my speaker or my caucus. He’s been very good to me.”
Asked about the call, Lang testified he knew McClain called him that day to deliver a message from Madigan. He said he knew that McClain often delivered messages for the speaker, and sometimes referred to Madigan as “our friend” or “‘Himself,’ as if it had a capital ‘H.’”
“It was very clear that there had been a decision made by the speaker that I was not going to move up in the ranks,” he told the jury.
Lang said that being “sent back to the Stratton Building” would be an insult to his 30-year career, an insider reference to an office building in Springfield where more junior legislators and staffers work. He also thought that if he resigned, “the speaker would show his appreciation in some way, use my talents in some way in the future.”
Lang wound up resigning days before he was to be sworn in for a new term in January 2019.
On cross examination by McClain’s attorney, Lang acknowledged that in decades as a legislator, “Mike Madigan never ordered me to do anything.” He also says he remembers “nothing” about Madigan doing anything special to pass ComEd’s legislation.
Asked if he was aware of any law that made it illegal for McClain to deliver Madigan’s messages, Lang said if he thought it was illegal, “I wouldn’t have listened.”
And you always listened? attorney Patrick Cotter asked.
“I didn’t always heed but I always heard.,” Lang replied.
Earlier, Lang had bristled when Cotter referred to “sexual harassment charges” in one of his questions.
“I was not facing sexual harassment charges. I’ll tell you right here in federal court that I resent the allegation and the inference!” Lang said loudly.
After his testimony, Lang declined to comment to a Tribune reporter.
Other recordings played in rapid succession by prosecutors on Thursday showed McClain speaking to a series of allies about his cozy relationship with Madigan.
In one snippet, McClain talked about how too many lobbyists start seeing the “almighty buck” and “drift away” from the focus on Madigan. In another, he told Craig Willert, a former top Madigan staffer who’d become a lobbyist, that “since I’m retired, (Madigan’s) decided to give me more assignments. I’m glad to help. Especially this cycle.”
Earlier Thursday, two other former Democratic state representatives testified about the process of politics and lobbying in Springfield and how Madigan lorded over that world during their time in the General Assembly.
Ex-Rep. Scott Drury, a Democrat from Highwood, said he never passed another bill after he voted “present” in the 2017 ballot to reelect Madigan as speaker, which is basically abstaining from support or opposition. Drury said he also was denied a chance to be a committee chairman once he started his own third, two-year term, a practice that Madigan had generally followed for years.
Drury recalled for the jury being whistled in for a meeting with Madigan in early 2017 at the speaker’s law office in Chicago, where Madigan asked about whether rumors that Drury was considering not voting for Madigan for speaker — or possibly even running himself.
Drury told the jury that while he never wanted to be speaker himself, he had indeed reached out to other representatives to see if they’d consider not supporting Madigan, because it only took nine or so votes to deny him another term.
“Did you find nine people who would vote against the speaker?” asked Assistant U.S. Attorney Julia Schwartz. Drury smiled, and replied, “No.”
Did you find anyone? the prosecutor asked. “No,” Drury said.
“It’s a very disconcerting feeling,” he said. “They were the speaker’s rules. He controlled the flow of legislation ... no one else had that power.”
One of the issues that did not come up during Drury’s direct examination was that Madigan gave special clocks to all of his Democratic troops — except Drury — that commemorated Madigan becoming the longest-serving speaker in American history.
The clock caper had been long symbolic of Drury’s relationship with the speaker.
Before Drury’s testimony, former state Rep. Carol Sente, who left the legislature in 2019, spent most of her time on the witness stand describing for prosecutors Madigan’s overall power and control over the legislative process.
Sente said she entered Madigan’s Capitol office after her proposal to set term limits on the four legislative leaders in control of each party. She said Madigan showed her a copy of the legislation and asked “if I could explain the bill, and why I was running it.”
She recalled that Madigan, who eventually served a national record 36 years as speaker, suggested it takes a while to get things organized.
She said she responded: “35 years?”
At about that point, Sente said, the “meeting was largely concluded,” saying Madigan thanked her and got up from his chair. It reflected a style often used by Madigan’s mentor, Mayor Richard J. Daley. Sente introduced the term-limit proposal twice, but it died in the House Rules Committee, an elite panel of Madigan’s loyalist members.
In a demonstration of Madigan’s style, Sente learned that she lost her chairmanship of the small business committee she’d run when the panel “disappeared” from the legislative website.
Sente said she arranged for a meeting with Madigan to talk about losing the committee and chairmanship — a job that comes with an extra $8,000 to $10,000 annual stipend. “But no meeting took place,” Sente said.
She said she lost the committee chairmanship for 10 months before it was restored and eventually was given chairmanship of a separate committee.
Pressed by a defense attorney, she was asked if Madigan actually told her he was punishing her. “He did not,” she said.
She testified about a bill addressing a constituent interest in “predatory lending.” But when that bill was also blocked, she asked Madigan about it while on the House floor.
Madigan, who had dealt with predatory lending legislation over the years, was “visibly upset,” saying, “Don’t bring that bill up again. It’s not moving forward.”
