Former Ald. Ed Burke (right) watches former Ald. Danny Solis (left) testify in federal court on Dec. 12, 2023. (WTTW News)

When Ed Burke asked alderperson-turned-government-mole Danny Solis the indelible question of whether or not he’d “landed the tuna,” prosecutors said he was interested, not in the redevelopment of a historic Chicago landmark, but rather only in a “financial tuna” for himself.

Closing arguments continued Thursday in the high-profile corruption case of the longtime 14th Ward alderperson and Finance Committee chair, with prosecutors zeroing in on perhaps the most elaborate of four criminal schemes Burke is charged with.

Burke faces 14 criminal charges, including racketeering, bribery and attempted extortion. He is being tried alongside his former aide Peter Andrews and Portage Park businessman Charles Cui.

Assistant U.S. Attorney Diane MacArthur walked jurors through each of the 19 counts charged against the three men in extreme detail across Wednesday afternoon and Thursday morning — explaining the definitions of each charge, the legal standards necessary to convict, and how she believes the prosecution met those standards.

But Burke’s defense attorney Joseph Duffy began his own closing Thursday afternoon by calling the prosecution’s case — specifically the numerous secret recordings that were presented to jurors without witness testimony — a “bunch of noise and a lot of confusion.”

“I think my head is spinning,” he said, minutes after MacArthur concluded her own closing argument, which lasted more than six hours over two days.

Duffy said the prosecution failed to prove Burke ever broke any laws, but instead threw numerous charges against the wall and left it to the jury to try and sort it out without direction. He also pointed to Burke’s decades spent as an elected official and asked why suddenly he would turn to corruption, and do so in a way where he doesn’t “make a penny.”

“In three years, know how much money went into his pocket?” Duffy asked. “Zero, nada.”

A ‘Financial Tuna’

MacArthur centered much of her argument Thursday on the Old Post Office allegations. Prosecutors have claimed Burke identified the $800 million renovation of the massive building, which needed an $18 million subsidy and a tax break worth $100 million from the city to move forward, as an opportunity to force the developer to hire his law firm.

Jurors once again heard and viewed conversations that Solis — the disgraced former 25th Ward alderperson who agreed to cooperate with federal investigators — had secretly recorded of himself with Burke discussing the renovation and whether Burke could get any tax work from the developers, the New York-based 601 West Companies.

In one phone call, Solis and Burke were discussing the renovation when Burke told his colleague: “While you’re at it, recommend the good firm of Klafter & Burke to do the tax work,” adding that “we can certainly talk about a marketing arraignment” for Solis as a part of that deal.

But when Burke later grew frustrated that 601 West had not yet hired his firm, he said in another call that “If we’re not signed up, we’re not going to do heavy lifting,” before adding that the “cash register has not rung yet.”

In May 2017, when Solis told Burke he had just spoken with Harry Skydell — who was leading 601 West’s renovation efforts — Burke asked Solis: “So, did we, uh, land the tuna?”

“If we land the tuna there certainly will be a day of accounting, you can count on that,” Burke told Solis.

MacArthur said these comments show that Burke’s interest in the Old Post Office was “purely financial.”

“Mr. Burke, in his mind, is seeking to land a financial tuna for himself and his law firm,” she said Thursday.

Solis — who has admitted taking a bribe as chair of the City Council’s Zoning Committee, but won’t face prison time due to his cooperation — was one of just two witnesses called by Burke’s defense team.

He testified that he was trying to aid himself by recording Burke, but he claimed that he wasn’t trying to get his former colleague to say “any particular thing.”

MacArthur noted that Burke’s defense team sought to show that it was Solis who was orchestrating these conversations, which often involved false information fed to him by FBI agents. But she told jurors “the evidence is the other way around.”

“It was Mr. Burke who was fully in control of the progression, or lack thereof, in what was going on,” she said.

Duffy countered that 601 West never needed anything from Burke, so they’d have no reason to try and curry his support by offering him tax appeal work on the side. He argued that then-Mayor Rahm Emanuel — whom he described as the “most powerful person in the city” — was already deadset on seeing the redevelopment completed.

Instead, Duffy pointed the finger at Solis, whose ward contained the Old Post Office property, saying that because he was the alderperson of that area, he could “make life hell” for the developers. And it was Solis, Duffy argued, who kept pestering Skydell to get him to hire Burke's firm.

"Why?" Duffy asked. "Because he didn’t want to go to jail. He’s a corrupt public official."

Pole Sign Episode

MacArthur on Thursday also delved into the final scheme Burke is accused of, in which he allegedly accepted a bribe of tax appeal work from Cui in exchange for helping him with his request for a large pole sign outside 4901 W. Irving Park Road, a former bank building that he had leased to Binny’s in Portage Park.

Cui was rebuffed by the Department of Buildings when he initially sought a permit for that sign, and then allegedly reached out to Burke in order to use the alderperson’s sway to try and get the city to reconsider.

Cui — who told Burke he would experience “extreme financial strain” and would have to give Binny’s a $750,000 break on rent without the sign — allegedly offered to send Burke tax appeal work if he could help him out.

MacArthur noted that Burke had no reason to help Cui — who didn’t even live in the alderperson’s 14th Ward — aside from that potential tax work.

Cui is also charged with making false statements to the FBI agents on the morning of Nov. 29, 2018, as other agents raided Burke’s offices and set off a political earthquake. In that interview, Cui allegedly said he never offered Burke tax work while dealing with the pole sign issue, and claimed he only reached out to Burke at all at a different point because he was a “good tax appeal attorney.”

When asked if he had provided accurate information to the best of his knowledge, Cui allegedly doubled down and said his answers were indeed accurate.

According to MacArthur, those were lies.

Duffy argued that Burke took no official action to help Cui, but instead simply made phone calls like he would for anyone else in his role as an alderperson.

“Fifty years on the job, he knows how to cut through bureaucracy,” he said. “And that’s why people come to him.”

According to Duffy, Klafter & Burke didn’t automatically get paid simply by taking on more clients. They had to file tax appeals and succeed in those appeals before they got any money, so there was never any guarantee of a “pay day.”

Duffy also referenced a screening process at Burke’s law firm, which sought to flag potential conflicts between clients of his law firm and official business appearing before the City Council or the Finance Committee. This, Duffy argued, allowed Burke to routinely recuse himself to avoid possible issues.

“There has to be criminal intent,” Duffy said. ”If you have a system in place where you know you're not going to have a conflict, that eliminates that criminal intent. … He doesn't have a corrupt state of mind and he has to have that to commit a crime.”

Before closing arguments resumed Thursday morning, a female juror was excused from the case. Judge Virginia Kendall said the juror had fallen ill and was unable to continue. This is the second time a juror has been excused for a medical issue, leaving just two more alternates left.

Closing arguments are scheduled to continue Friday.

Heather Cherone contributed to this story.