Michael J. MadiganComEd lawyers tried again Tuesday to distance the former Illinois House speaker from an old friend and confidant, pressing ComEd’s former top lawyer about whether he had direct knowledge of the men discussing an unusual contract with a lawyers.

But federal prosecutors have just amassed more evidence of routine, ongoing conversations. between Madigan and Michael McClainwho are being tried together for conspiracy to racketeering. The feds did it by calling Will Cousineau, Madigan’s longtime assistant to the witness stand.

Cousineau, who became Cornerstone’s Government Affairs lobbyist in 2017, testified for less than an hour before the court adjourned for the day Tuesday. But he told jurors that Madigan and McClain sometimes arranged to use his office to meet alone.

“I think (McClain) and the Speaker spoke pretty regularly,” Cousineau testified.

Cousineau finished his government career as a senior adviser to Madigan. He also testified in two other trials in 2023. But this is the first time he has taken the witness stand with Madigan in the room. He told jurors that Madigan was “the person who makes the final decisions” in the House.

Madigan and Cousineau had little or no interaction in the courtroom Tuesday. Madigan watched Cousineau’s testimony with a poker face. When the hearing ended for the day, Madigan began packing his things, his back to Cousineau, as Cousineau left the courtroom.

Madigan, who resigned in 2021, He is accused of leading a criminal enterprise designed to enhance his political power and enrich his allies. Prosecutors say McClain, who worked as a ComEd lobbyist, was the agent who handled Madigan’s “dirty work.”

The jury members have already heard several recordings that demonstrate their close relationship and communication. This despite earlier arguments by Madigan’s lawyers that he was “ignorant” of what people were saying behind his back.

Before Cousineau took the stand Tuesday, jurors heard more testimony from former ComEd general counsel Thomas O’Neill. He previously told jurors about the pressure he felt from McClain to sign and renew a contract for the law firm of Madigan ally Victor Reyes. It happened when ComEd needed House approval for legislation crucial to its bottom line.

O’Neill also said the deal was unusual because it guaranteed 850 hours of work a year to the law firm.

When O’Neill attempted to reduce that guarantee, McClain wrote an email to then-ComEd CEO Anne Pramaggiore in January 2016. He referred to Madigan as “our friend” and warned Pramaggiore that Reyes would go to Madigan.

“Our friend will call me and then I will call you,” McClain wrote. “Is this a drill we have to go through?”

When Madigan’s attorney, Dan Collins, had the opportunity to question O’Neill on Tuesday, he pressed him about his actual knowledge of Madigan’s involvement.

O’Neill admitted that he had begun to wonder if McClain was invoking Madigan’s name without permission. When Collins asked if O’Neill had any reason to think “Madigan had any interest” in the contract, O’Neill said he could only point to “background” information, such as Reyes’ role as a Democratic fundraiser.

“Other than these emails, do you have no direct knowledge of any conversations between Michael McClain and Michael Madigan regarding Reyes Kurson’s contract?” Collins pressed.

“Correct,” O’Neill responded.

O’Neill also acknowledged to Assistant U.S. Attorney Sarah Streicker that he was not involved in conversations McClain had with Madigan, Pramaggiore or fellow ComEd lobbyist John Hooker, who all captured on secret FBI recordings that jurors will hear.

Meanwhile, McClain’s attorney, Patrick Cotter, directly asked O’Neill if he remembered McClain ever suggesting that the utility should “trade jobs at ComEd” to secure Madigan’s vote on the legislation.

“I don’t remember him saying those words, no,” O’Neill responded.

Cotter asked O’Neill about people who were recommended for jobs at ComEd but were never hired, including Madigan’s son-in-law. He asked whether telling McClain “no” to a labor recommendation would jeopardize ComEd legislation.

“I don’t remember him ever using those words,” O’Neill said, referring to McClain.

O’Neill agreed that McClain could be “persistent,” but said he did not believe McClain violated ComEd ethics policies by making employment recommendations. O’Neill also said it was not unusual for lobbyists to make hiring recommendations, or for ComEd to hire someone to improve political relations for its benefit.

When asked if McClain was a valuable asset to the utility, O’Neill agreed. He said McClain was hired specifically because of his connection to Madigan, whose historical relationship with ComEd “had not been great.”

Cotter asked if it improved when McClain was hired.

“I would say yes,” O’Neill said.

In fact, Cousineau’s testimony later put McClain in the room with Madigan and members of his staff as they discussed some of ComEd’s key 2015 laws.

Aside from McClain, a ComEd lobbyist, everyone else at that meeting were current or former employees of the Speaker’s office, according to Cousineau.