A federal prosecutor told jurors Thursday that then-Illinois House Speaker Michael J. Madigan was involved “from Step One” with an allegedly bogus AT&T Illinois contract for a former legislative ally.
“This was a contract that Madigan controlled,” Assistant U.S. Attorney Julia Schwartz said.
And, she added, “he knew it was intended to be a bribe.”
The prosecutor made her comment as she continued her closing argument in Madigan’s racketeering conspiracy trial, and as she began to wade into allegations involving AT&T and former state Rep. Edward “Eddie” Acevedo.
Madigan testified earlier this month that he didn’t even know AT&T hired Acevedo until he learned about it as part of his criminal case. But Schwartz has spent much of her overall argument undermining Madigan’s testimony, calling various comments he made a “facade” or even a “lie.”
Meanwhile, the feds’ claims about AT&T led to a mistrial last September when a separate jury failed to reach a verdict in the case of ex-AT&T Illinois President Paul La Schiazza. He faced trial over $22,500 the utility allegedly paid to Acevedo as a bribe to Madigan.
Now, the feds are trying to prove Madigan guilty of his role in the same alleged scheme, among others.
Madigan is accused of leading a criminal enterprise designed to enhance his political power and reward his associates. Prosecutors say his longtime ally, Michael McClain, acted as his agent.
Closing arguments began in the nearly four-month trial Wednesday afternoon and are expected to last for days. Schwartz ended her portion of the initial argument before lunch Thursday. Assistant U.S. Attorney Diane MacArthur was expected to take over when jurors returned from their meal.
AT&T agreed to hire Acevedo and made the payments in 2017, shortly after Acevedo left the Legislature. It did so while pushing for passage of a bill that would help the utility end its costly obligation to provide landline phone service to everyone in Illinois.
McClain reached out to AT&T in February 2017 asking for a small contract for Acevedo. Two days after that, McClain allegedly told La Schiazza that Madigan had assigned McClain to work on AT&T’s legislation as a “special project.”
The contract for Acevedo suddenly became an urgent issue for La Schiazza more than a month later, on March 28, 2017, when he told his team he “got a call” and wanted them to “move quickly” on Acevedo’s contract.
Thing is, no one at AT&T Illinois was particularly impressed with Acevedo. During her argument Thursday, Schwartz called him “toxic.”
“Had a drinking problem,” she said. “Didn’t have a good reputation.”
She told jurors Acevedo was valuable to Madigan because of the growing Hispanic population in Madigan’s district. And, she pointed to records of phone calls as she argued that Madigan knew about Acevedo’s hiring, despite his testimony under oath.
Schwartz pointed out that, about 90 minutes before McClain’s initial reach-out to AT&T about Acevedo, a call was placed between McClain’s phone and Madigan’s statehouse office. Then, she said McClain’s phone called Acevedo’s phone before McClain reached out to AT&T.
“This tells you that Madigan is involved from Step One,” Schwartz said. “He asked McClain to handle it. McClain passes on the message, starts working to get it done within 95 minutes.”
AT&T’s legislation became law after the state House and Senate voted around July 1, 2017, to override a veto from then-Gov. Bruce Rauner. Madigan voted in favor of the bill and to override the veto.
Schwartz also argued that a controversial witness called by defense attorneys, retired AT&T lobbyist Stephen Selcke, actually caused damage to the defense teams.
Prosecutors called Selcke to the stand during La Schiazza’s trial, but his testimony then was seen as problematic. So much so, that he became a defense witness in Madigan’s trial.
When he testified in December, Selcke told jurors there was “a concern” that not hiring Acevedo “might trigger a negative reaction from the Speaker’s office” when it came to AT&T’s legislation.
“Steve Selcke told you that Eddie Acevedo was hired to make sure Madigan would not pose any potential impediment,” Schwartz told the jury.