Once inseparable, trial divides Madigan and McClain

CHICAGO — As the jury in the corruption trial of the United States versus Michael Madigan and Michael McClain that began on Oct. 8 enters its third week of deliberation, jurors are processing the relationship of two men who seemingly have been there for each other for more than four decades and how it will impact the verdicts they will deliver.

Madigan, reputably the most powerful politician in the history of Illinois, was bolstered by McClain, the fixer known as a man who got things done in Springfield and Chicago and for his hometown of Quincy.

McClain’s cache relied on one thing: His access to Madigan, the speaker of the Illinois House of Representatives for 40 years.

McClain took over as a state representative in 1972 after his father, State Rep. Elmo McClain, suffered a heart attack and died on the House floor. Madigan, seven years McClain’s elder, took him under his wing.

McClain lost his state rep seat to Jeff Mays in 1980 and became a lobbyist. Madigan’s ascension to the speaker’s chair aided McClain’s lobbying career.

McClain has often joked and thanked Mays for defeating him and “making him a rich man,” but Madigan deserves the lion’s share of credit for McClain’s success. Of course, that success is now fleeting as the cost of mounting a legal defense against federal corruption charges has cost McClain hundreds of thousands of dollars.

McClain, a former contract lobbyist for power company ComEd, was found guilty in May 2023 of nine counts of conspiracy bribery and falsifying records along with former ComEd CEO Anne Pramaggiore. Former City Club of Chicago President Jay Doherty, who served for decades as an external lobbyist for the utility, and John Hooker, a former ComEd executive turned contract lobbyist for the company, were each found guilty of six counts. Prosecutors successfully argued that the foursome gave Madigan allies jobs and contracts at the utility in exchange for an easier path for ComEd-supported legislation in Springfield.

The current case against McClain is the feds’ second swing at him after nailing him the first time around. McClain and the other three defendants in the ComEd trial are out on appeal.

This time seems more personal. The government has made Madigan its prime target, with McClain being alongside as he was in Springfield for decades.

McClain refused to testify against the man he referred to as “our friend,” a term frequently used as codespeak when McClain was doing business with people involved in dealings with Madigan (which was shady in and of itself, but lots of McClain’s dialogue would’ve been tossed out of any Scorsese mob-related movie for being too cheesy).

However, Madigan and his legal team had no such feelings toward McClain. The former speaker’s testimony attempted to distance “Himself” (another cheesy McClain description of Madigan) from his consigliere. Madigan downplayed the friendship that had been the focal point of the prosecution against the two men.

During his time on the witness stand in mid-January, Madigan was asked by McClain attorney Patrick Cotter whether Madigan’s relationship with McClain had survived in the 40 years since they’d served in the state Legislature together in the 1970s and 1980s.

“It did, until recently,” Madigan testified.

McClain sent an email to Pramaggiore in Jan. 2016 complaining that the law firm of Victor Reyes, a Madigan ally, was having trouble with a contract renewal.

“I know the drill, and so do you,” McClain wrote. “If you do not get involved and resolve this issue of 850 hours for his firm, then (Reyes) will go to our Friend. Our Friend will call me, and then I will call you. Is this a drill we must go through?”

Madigan acknowledged on the stand he was the “friend” McClain was referring to. However, he denied knowing anything about these contract negotiations, said he didn’t recall Reyes asking him for help and he never instructed McClain to push for any extra hours in that contract.

“Did you know he was expressing this sentiment to ComEd on your behalf?” Madigan attorney Dan Collins asked.

“No,” Madigan replied.

Collins followed up with, “Did you instruct Mike McClain to express this sentiment to ComEd on your behalf?”

Again, Madigan denied it.

Madigan also pushed back a question from Cotter, who asked if McClain was a “master of House rules and procedure” in Springfield.

“I don’t know if I’d use the word ‘master,’” Madigan said with a laugh. “But he was aware and knowledgeable.”

At another point, Cotter asked if Madigan agreed that McClain “earned a certain amount of trust as a lobbyist?”

“At the time, yes,” Madigan said.

“Did you ever actually take any official action to benefit a piece of Com Ed-supported legislation because of any job that Com Ed may have given to somebody you referred to Mike McClain?” Cotter asked.

“No,” said Madigan, with his third denial before the cock crowed.

One Chicago lawyer who has been observing the trial told the Sun-Times last month, “Basically Madigan threw Mr. McClain under the bus. He’s basically said, ‘All those tapes the jury heard, that was McClain freelancing. Mr. McClain’s lawyer is now cross-examining and has a difficult job. If he says, ‘Wait a minute, my guy was doing it all at your request,’ then he’s effectively admitting part of the scheme. And he’s not doing that. We’re seeing Mr. Cotter going around the edges of this.” […]

The prosecution had so many examples of McClain serving as Madigan’s consigliere, including Madigan seeking out national PR help with the #MeToo crisis in Springfield where McClain had to carry the message from Madigan to veteran State Rep. Lou Lang to resign as part of it and and helping the son of former Congressman Bobby Rush find work after being fired for sexual misconduct.

McClain’s loyalty was on full display in his retirement letter that told Madigan and his wife that he would never retire from them.

“You knew Mr. McClain was very loyal to you, didn’t you?” the prosecutor asked.

“Yes, I did,” Madigan said.

“Were you very loyal to Mr. McClain?”

“I don’t think I was as loyal to him as he was to me,” Madigan answered.

That’s what a bus hitting you sounds like.

Madigan’s testimony made it sound like McClain was his chauffer or his waiter from Saputo’s, the Springfield restaurant where the two men famously held court. During Madigan’s testimony, reporters in the courtroom said McClain was dabbing his eyes with a tissue.

Many people in Quincy have also chosen to separate the two formerly inseparable men. Some are comfortable with their disdain for Madigan and Chicago politics, but some see certain things McClain has done for the community and look at him through rose-colored glasses.

The Quincy Senior Center and the Oakley-Lindsay Center have rooms bearing the McClain family’s name for his assistance in making those facilities a reality. When Madigan and former Governor Bruce Rauner were at each other’s throats, it was McClain who served as a go-between to ensure the Illinois Veterans Home at Quincy would remain open following the Legionnaires’ outbreak in 2015 and keep hundreds of state jobs in Quincy.

McClain received the 2011 Distinguished Citizen Award from the Mississippi Valley Council 141 Boy Scouts of America. The Quincy Catholic Elementary Schools Foundation honored McClain, his parents and siblings in 2016 with the Friend of Catholic Education Award. McClain is a former member of the Quincy University Board of Trustees and is a member of the QU Legal Hall of Fame.

After serving as Quincy’s mayor from 1977 to 1985, Republican C. David Nuessen tried a political comeback as he ran for the office in 2005 after Chuck Scholz retired from the role. Nuessen lost to Democrat John Spring, who McClain helped recruit to run as a Democrat and was instrumental in Spring’s victory over Nuessen, as thousands of Madigan-McClain connected dollars flowed in from Chicago to Spring’s campaign.

Still, years later, Nuessen, who served on the QU Board of Trustees with McClain, gave him a pass.

“Mike McClain has a great reputation, notwithstanding this particular thing that’s going on,” he said to Chicago’s wbez.org in Nov. 2019. “Mike is recognized as making great contributions in the community.”

After McClain’s first guilty conviction in May 2023, I wrote the following: “Despite his hubris, McClain was no Brutus to Madigan’s Caesar. He was Antony. Loyal to the end. Except in this act, Antony falls before Caesar.”

Turns out, in this version, Brutus and Caesar might be the same man.

As we wait to see if Madigan suffers any consequences for being the Godfather, we shouldn’t be surprised if he walks as his former friends and allies serve as collateral damage.