‘Make it a federal court suit’: Jurors hear wiretap of McClain
describing subcontracts alleged to be bribes
Send a link to a friend
[November 16, 2024]
By Hannah Meisel
CHICAGO – For nearly eight years, former Chicago Ald. Frank Olivo had a
monthly ritual.
The retired politician would sign an invoice for $4,000 – always
identical but for the date – that said the money was owed for “services
rendered in connection with Commonwealth Edison.”
Most months, Olivo would go to an Office Max in south suburban Crestwood
and spend a few dollars to have his invoice faxed to a woman named Jan
Gallegos, the longtime administrative assistant to Jay Doherty, who for
decades counted ComEd as his most steady lobbying client.
Even when Olivo’s son-in-law eventually began emailing the invoices on
his behalf, Olivo would still handwrite a short note to Gallegos on the
cover sheets he always included with his faxes. They’d often wish her
well and thank her “for all your help!” One note, dated March 31, 2014,
seemed to be referencing the temperature rising above 60 degrees that
day for the first time in months after a brutally cold winter.
“Jan, it’s springtime?” Olivo wrote in his signature scrawl. “Thanks,
Frank.”
By then, Olivo had been receiving monthly checks from Doherty for 2 ½
years. But federal prosecutors allege Olivo never did any work for the
payments, which continued through April of 2019. Instead, the government
alleges, Olivo was one of several subcontractors connected with former
Illinois House Speaker Michael Madigan whom ComEd indirectly paid
through Doherty’s firm as part of a yearslong bribery scheme in exchange
for favorable legislation in Springfield for the utility.
A few weeks after the date on Olivo’s last $4,000 check, FBI agents
raided Doherty’s downtown Chicago office, searching for documents
related to the former alderman and other do-nothing subcontractors,
while a separate squad of agents searched Olivo’s home in Palos Heights.
A federal jury on Thursday heard from agents involved in those searches
– both of whom said they found no evidence of work product Olivo or the
other subcontractors did on behalf of ComEd.
Among the items the agents seized in both searches were Olivo’s many fax
cover sheets, two of which included similar handwritten messages to
Gallegos that revealed just how little he was in contact with the man
whose name was on his monthly checks: “Say hello to Jay.”
Olivo has not been charged with a crime, nor have the other
subcontractors. But Doherty last year was convicted of orchestrating the
Madigan bribery scheme along with two other ex-ComEd lobbyists and the
utility’s former CEO.
And for the last month, the “ComEd Four” case has been reprised as part
of Madigan’s bribery and racketeering trial at the Dirksen Federal
Courthouse in Chicago. Standing trial alongside the former speaker is
Mike McClain, ComEd’s top contract lobbyist in Springfield and longtime
friend and advisor to Madigan.
The jury has already heard wiretapped phone calls in which McClain
describes himself as Madigan’s “agent” and says the speaker was his
“real client” after a decadeslong career of contract lobbying for a
portfolio of clients, ComEd chief among them.
Thursday marked the end of six days on the witness stand for star
government witness Fidel Marquez, a ComEd executive-turned-FBI mole who
secretly video recorded conversations with his colleagues, including
McClain.
In several of those videos, shown to the jury last week, McClain can be
heard explaining the Doherty subcontractor arrangement, including one
where he characterizes it as a “favor.” In another secretly recorded
meeting, Doherty counseled Marquez to try to keep the contracts as-is to
“keep Madigan happy.”
While attorneys for the former speaker used cross-examination of Marquez
to try to distance Madigan from McClain, the jury heard more intercepted
phone calls on Thursday aimed at undercutting that narrative.
In one February 2019 conversation, McClain and former ComEd lobbyist
John Hooker discussed having come up with the subcontractor arrangement
in 2011, starting with Olivo. By the time of the call, Doherty had spent
years paying three other Madigan allies under his contract, while other
lobbyists close to Madigan had also taken on two of the do-nothing
contractors for periods of time.
“We had to hire these guys because Mike Madigan came to us,” McClain
told Hooker. “It’s just that simple … So if you want to make it a
federal court suit, okay, but that’s how simple it is.”
Hooker agreed, asserting that the arrangement was “clean for all of us.”
“Right. We don’t have to worry about whether or not – I’m just making
this up – whether or not Mike Zalewski Sr., is doing any work or not,”
McClain said, referring to a former Chicago alderman who’d been put on
Doherty’s contract the summer before, after he’d retired from the city
council. “That’s up to Jay Doherty to prove that.”
[to top of second column]
|
The Dirksen Federal Courthouse in Chicago sits across Dearborn
Street from Alexander Calder’s “Flamingo” sculpture. Former Illinois
House Speaker Michael Madigan’s bribery and racketeering trial
finished its fourth week of testimony in the courthouse on Thursday.
(Capitol News Illinois photo by Andrew Adams)
In another wiretapped call 10 months earlier, McClain and Hooker
discussed Madigan’s request to add Zalewski to Doherty’s roster.
“That has paid off for us in the past, Michael. It took me and you to
think of that, though,” Hooker said. “I think he (Madigan) thought I
might have been crazy when I suggested that.”
Hooker was also convicted alongside McClain, Doherty and ComEd’s former
CEO Anne Pramaggiore in last year’s “ComEd Four” trial.
Attorneys for the defendants are fighting their convictions in light of
a U.S. Supreme Court decision this summer that narrowed the federal
bribery statute to exclude “gratuities” – rewards given to a public
official after he or she takes an “official act.” The ruling also
stipulated that “for a payment to constitute a bribe, there must be an
upfront agreement to exchange the payment for taking an official
action.”
Prosecutors did not present evidence of an explicit quid pro quo
handshake deal, instead relying on a “stream of benefits” legal theory
in which a pattern of corrupt exchanges over a long period of time is
proof enough. But in a motion filed Thursday, lawyers for the ComEd
defendants wrote the jury that convicted their clients was “wrongly
instructed” and urged the judge to “end this case now.”
Also on Thursday, attorneys for former AT&T Illinois President Paul La
Schiazza presented arguments for acquittal after a jury deadlocked on
whether La Schiazza bribed Madigan in a similar scheme to ComEd’s,
albeit smaller. In the hearing, lawyers debated whether an explicit
agreement to an exchange was required to prove bribery in the case.
Five floors down from where those arguments were taking place in the
courthouse, Madigan attorney Tom Breen tried to inject the same legal
theory into his final questions to Marquez, who was most often the
person dealing with job recommendations McClain brought to ComEd on
Madigan’s behalf.
“You always maintained that in this situation, these jobs, these
situations, whatever, there was no quid pro quo entered into, correct?”
Breen asked.
“We did these favors so Madigan would be favorably disposed to our
legislative agenda,” Marquez said after a bit of back-and-forth.
“Was there ever a quid pro quo? And you know what that means – ” Breen
asked before prosecutors objected to the question, ultimately leaving it
unanswered.
The issue came up in yet another February 2019 recording the jury heard
Thursday, in which McClain, Pramaggiore and Hooker discussed the need
for someone to finally replace McClain in the role he’d retired from
more than two years prior.
McClain had served as ComEd’s top external lobbyist and had always been
formally assigned to lobby Madigan. But company executives also knew
that McClain had a longstanding relationship with the speaker and would
act as his emissary, communicating messages between ComEd and Madigan,
whether on legislation, job recommendations or other matters.
In retirement, however, McClain was not in Springfield as much as he
used to be, while ComEd had also undergone significant leadership
changes. Pramaggiore, who’d spent years cultivating relationships with
McClain and Madigan, had been promoted to a job leading ComEd parent
company Exelon Utilities the previous summer, leaving new CEO Joe
Dominguez at the helm. Dominguez was new to Chicago and was a former
federal prosecutor – both of which made McClain wary of entrusting him
to act on requests from the speaker.
“Joe – I don’t think he really respects Madigan,” McClain said. “So I
wouldn’t trust Joe. I would trust Joe to think that this is a quid pro
quo and that he’s wired.”
Still, McClain offered to have a “daddy talk” with Dominguez.
“My instinct is that I come up to Chicago and I sit down with Dominguez
and say, ‘Now look-it asshole, if you want to pass this bill, this is
what it requires,’” McClain said. “‘If you wanna fire me today that’s
fine but this is like serious business, it’s millions of dollars. So
either you wanna look like you’re the leader, and be the leader, but
that means you’ve gotta authorize your people to do things.’”
Capitol News Illinois is
a nonprofit, nonpartisan news service that distributes state government
coverage to hundreds of news outlets statewide. It is funded primarily
by the Illinois Press Foundation and the Robert R. McCormick Foundation.
|