The shockingly abrupt end to House Speaker Michael Madigan’s nearly four-decade reign over Illinois politics was only two years away when a trio of key players in the ongoing “ComEd Four” trial gathered in early 2019 for a secretly recorded conference call.

Unaware of the bribery investigation swirling around them, Anne Pramaggiore and Michael McClain were planning a bright future in Madigan’s good graces. First, though, they had to hash out a problem: Who was going to be their new point person to maintain the cozy relationship with Madigan and keep the legislative wins coming?

“We’re in a conundrum,” McClain, the former ComEd lobbyist and longtime Madigan confidant, said on the Feb. 22, 2019, call, which was played in the courtroom last week.

They were joined on the call by senior ComEd executive Fidel Marquez, who went along with the strategy session as he had many times in his seven years managing the utility’s legislative affairs team.

A recorded phone conversation between Michael McClain, Anne Pramaggiore and Fidel Marquez was played at the “ComEd Four” trial. (Chicago Tribune Handout)

What McClain and Pramaggiore didn’t know was that there was a fourth party on the line: the FBI.

“We wanted to put the three of us together,” Pramaggiore said to Marquez, who unbeknownst to her had secretly agreed to cooperate with federal authorities, breaking the bribes-for-favors scandal wide open. “We — we’ve got a problem with the Springfield dynamics.”

Listen to the audio, which was split into two parts when submitted into evidence:

The recording went on to put the jury in the middle of a fascinating brainstorming session, one that got to the heart of the long and mutually beneficial relationship between the company and the speaker.

It came at a time that Madigan was still riding high, enjoying the success of his legislative victories in the 2018 election, where he racked up his biggest-ever majority of 74 House Democrats. He’d worked through a 2018 #MeToo reckoning in Springfield, where he needed to oust top aides and allies. And Democrat J.B. Pritzker had defeated Madigan’s Republican nemesis, Gov. Bruce Rauner, whose political battles with the speaker had driven Illinois into dire fiscal straits over their two-year standoff.

But it turned out Madigan’s winning streak was about to come to an end. Less than three months after the strategy call, the feds raided McClain’s home in Quincy and those of other top allies around Chicago, the first public sign of the investigation that ultimately would end Madigan’s nationwide record 36 years as speaker.

In January 2021, Madigan was dethroned by his own House Democrats, followed by his indictment in March 2022 on racketeering charges.

The ComEd Four trial, now headed into its fourth week, has offered a sort of preview to Madigan’s case, which is set for trial in April 2024.

Along with McClain and Pramaggiore, the two other defendants are John Hooker, a former ComEd executive and longtime lobbyist, and Jay Doherty, a ComEd contract lobbyist and ex-president of the City Club civic organization.

They are accused of steering $1.3 million in payments from ComEd to Madigan-approved subcontractors with Doherty’s consulting firm who did little or no work in a bid to win the speaker’s influence over the utility’s legislative agenda in Springfield.

[ ‘ComEd Four’ trial: Evidence seen and heard by the jury ]

The indictment also alleged the defendants schemed to hire a clout-heavy law firm run by Madigan’s onetime ally Victor Reyes, appoint former McPier boss Juan Ochoa to the company’s board of directors, and stack the utility’s summer internship program with candidates sent from Madigan’s 13th Ward.

The four on trial have all pleaded not guilty. Their lawyers have contended the government is trying to turn legal lobbying into a crime.

Meanwhile, Marquez, the government’s star witness, will return to the witness stand for a fifth day Monday for more questioning from the defense, followed by redirect by the prosecution. He pleaded guilty to bribery conspiracy, and prosecutors have agreed to not seek any jail time in exchange for his truthful cooperation.

By the time the February 2019 call was placed, McClain had been so close to Madigan for so long — dating to when they met as young lawmakers in the 1970s — and had been so loyal to him that utility officials in the trial testified that they viewed their lobbyist as a “double agent.”

For years, no one had greater access to Madigan or more of his trust than McClain, who camped out inside the speaker’s suite or just outside of his office on a padded bench in the Capitol’s rotunda while dispensing tidbits of knowledge to lobbyists and lawmakers seduced by his insider information.

But McClain had retired as a ComEd lobbyist at the end of 2016, only weeks after a major victory in the legislature for the utility’s parent company, Exelon, to save two nuclear power plants and the union jobs that went with them while boosting costs for consumers.

Despite his retirement, McClain stayed busy. ComEd hired him back as a consultant because officials had to call him so often for advice. He also took on what he called Madigan’s “assignments,” kept abreast of political strategy and played an instrumental role in fundraising for the speaker.

In the recorded phone call, McClain recounted for Pramaggiore and Marquez that his absence as a full-time lobbyist in Springfield had prompted Madigan to say he needed someone to fill the role of an all-purpose, one-stop-shop that McClain had so adeptly handled.

Having briefed Pramaggiore already, McClain immediately brought Marquez up to speed.

“So Fidel,” McClain said, the “speaker called me up and said, ‘You know, Mike, um, we have this green set of (pro-environmentalist) bills that they want to do. … Exelon Generation wants to do something. And no matter what happened in the past, I’ve just always gone to you. … I always used you as the point person. But you’re not here anymore, so who’s the point person?’

“And this is like at 4 or 4:30 at night, and he said, ‘So if you can still get back to me before I go to dinner, I’d appreciate it.’

“I went, ‘Holy schtick,’” McClain said, laughing and clearing his throat.

“Wow,” Marquez said.

Later in the call, McClain explained his double-agent role, telling Marquez that the “point person has to … have his trust and the company’s trust.”

“And that person’s gotta be very discreet,” McClain said, pausing to clear his throat. “And whoever that person is, uh, talking for the company, uh, like, let, let’s say it’s you. Uh, there’s a code, right?”

“Code” is a word used often in the trial.

Sometimes it’s a code that McClain uses rather than say Madigan’s name, such when he talks or writes to others and refers to the speaker as “Our Friend” or “Himself.” McClain once told authorities in an unrelated matter that he does that because no one knows who may be listening.

At other times, the code is a reference for how to interpret Madigan’s occasionally cryptic way of saying what he wants without directly asking for it and how he might expect those around him to understand what they should do.

The call gave jurors a chance to hear McClain describe such an instance in detail.

“So, like, when all of a sudden I come to you and say … ‘Would you take a look at this resume?’ I mean, that’s like, ‘Will you drop and do and try to get this done as fast as possible?’ Right?” McClain said.

McClain then gave another example of what to do if a lawmaker has a complaint, goes to the speaker for help and the speaker then turns to his point person.

“The speaker says, ‘McClain take a look at this.’ Uh, it’s, like, that, that sort of code that you know, ‘Do everything that you can to fix it right away,’ right?” McClain said on the recording. “That’s what we’ve always done, but now we’re in a situation where, um, what do we do?”

McClain further explained Madigan’s point person should be a contract lobbyist rather than an actual full-time ComEd or Exelon employee, suggesting that juggling the complexities of the job as the go-between for Madigan and the utilities could be difficult or problematic for someone inside the company.

“So it’s gotta be an agent,” McClain said.

McClain raised the idea of making that agent Will Cousineau, a lobbyist who long worked as Madigan’s government-side political director and held a ranking position in the Madigan-run Democratic Party of Illinois.

“I’ve been trying to mentor him,” McClain said. “But I, I don’t, I don’t know if he’s ready yet. You know what I mean? I know Heather’s not ready yet.” He was referring to Heather Wier Vaught, previously the speaker’s top lawyer, whom Marquez called a tough but fair negotiator on utility legislation, a job she handled on various issues many times.

Cousineau and Wier Vaught, who now has her own law firm, both left state government at different times and became contract lobbyists for ComEd and other clients. Testimony showed they participated with McClain and other ranking staffers in the speaker’s elite small group of political and legislative advisers on Sunday morning conference calls.

While Cousineau may have been known as a Madigan loyalist, that took on a new dimension when he became a surprise witness in the ComEd Four case last month, testifying under a grant of immunity from prosecutors.

Cousineau’s testimony could prove pivotal, as he so far is the only witness to describe how Madigan played a direct role in getting the Future Energy Jobs Act legislation passed for ComEd in 2016.

He told the jury that in the frenetic final hours before a vote, Madigan explicitly sent him out to the House floor to “work the bill” and rally advocates, which helped make the difference between the legislation passing or coming up a few votes short. Madigan himself did not cast a vote on the bill, suggesting neutrality despite his alleged assistance in passage.

Cousineau also provided an insider look at Madigan’s political operation, including private meetings with his inner circle of advisers to discuss legislative and campaign strategy — at least one of which was secretly recorded by the FBI.

He also offered insight into the political “A-Team” that made up Madigan’s vaunted 13th Ward operation, including Ray Nice, former Ald. Frank Olivo, current 13th Ward Ald. Marty Quinn, and precinct captains and twin brothers Ed and Fred Moody, whom he would dispatch to key races to knock on doors and deliver votes.

So far, Cousineau is the only person from Madigan’s inner circle to take the witness stand. While Wier Vaught’s name has frequently popped up in the trial, she is not expected to testify.

The February 2019 call also gave a glimpse of how Pramaggiore, despite her new role at Exelon Utilities, plotted how to keep up the Madigan connections but work around Joe Dominguez, the new ComEd CEO who also happened to be a former federal prosecutor.

McClain told Marquez that he should be the one to broach the idea of having an outside point person for both Madigan and then-Senate President John Cullerton.

Pramaggiore then told Marquez that he should make a recommendation to Dominguez that ComEd should consider making that point person McClain or Hooker.

“They’re seasoned. They know what they’re doing. The speaker will accept them,” Pramaggiore said, adding that part of the “calculus” is putting the idea on the table for Dominguez so that he “can decide what he wants to do.”

rlong@chicagotribune.com

jmeisner@chicagotribune.com