U.S. Senator Jon Husted testified in the trial related to the largest public corruption scheme in Ohio history on Wednesday morning, maintaining his distance from the FirstEnergy executives. However, there were some discrepancies between his testimony and public documents.
After he was unable to testify last week due to the "Iran war," Husted appeared over Zoom in the Summit County Court of Common Pleas.
"Are you happy to be here?" Assistant Attorney General Matthew Meyer asked.
"Thrilled," Husted responded sarcastically, with no humor in his voice.
The senator made it clear that he was there to answer questions — that's it.
"Are you here in defense of them?" Meyer asked.
"No," Husted responded.
For the past five weeks, the state has made its case that former FirstEnergy CEO Chuck Jones and VP Mike Dowling paid former Public Utilities Commission Chair Sam Randazzo $4.3 million in bribes, along with $61 million spent to create and pass House Bill 6. H.B. 6 was legislation to provide a billion-dollar bailout to their struggling nuclear facilities, all at the expense of Ohio ratepayers.
In March of 2023, a federal jury found that former Ohio House Speaker Larry Householder and former GOP leader Matt Borges, beyond a reasonable doubt, participated in this racketeering scheme that has now left four men guilty and two dead by suicide. Householder is nearly three years into his 20-year prison sentence for accepting the bribe from FirstEnergy, while Borges is out after serving half of his five-year sentence.
For a more in-depth recap, please click here.
"I think both the defense and prosecution did well in terms of the testimony," Case Western Reserve University business law professor Eric Chaffee said. "Probably the person who performed best of all was Senator Husted."
Husted was well prepared, the expert continued.
"It's pretty clear that he wants to distance himself from the defendants and the matter as much as possible," Chaffee said.
He also gave himself a lot of grace by saying he didn't recall plenty of times when asked questions, Chaffee said.
During Husted's hour on the stand, the defense tried to prove that FirstEnergy had no need to bribe Randazzo.
Randazzo, who is now dead, was the corrupt one, not the former executives, the defense argued. Randazzo, facing dozens of charges in federal and state court, became the second defendant in this scheme to kill himself. He died by suicide in 2024, after his joint arraignment with Jones and Dowling, and after pleading not guilty.
Before Randazzo was the top regulator, he was a consultant for clients who worked with FirstEnergy and wanted to get a better deal from them (he was also a consultant for FirstEnergy, as well). Randazzo ran the books for the Industrial Energy Users-Ohio, a legitimate trade group.
The defense said that FirstEnergy was simply paying the former PUCO chair settlement funds owed to IEU-Ohio clients, but Randazzo stole that money from them.
RELATED: Everything you need to know about the FirstEnergy trial if you haven't been paying attention
Watch his testimony below:
Choices
Defense attorney Steve Grimes used Husted to show that he and Governor Mike DeWine were the ones who wanted Randazzo in power, not FirstEnergy, which wanted someone else.
"They were advocating for Jason Rafeld," Husted said.
The FirstEnergy team invited DeWine and Husted to a private meeting at the Athletic Club of Columbus in 2018, after they were elected. Husted said he couldn't recall exactly what he, DeWine and FirstEnergy lobbyists discussed. He did remember they wanted Rafeld.
What he said he didn't know was that the executives zoomed to Randazzo's home afterward, where they allegedly talked about the bribe payment, Meyer said.
Then, Randazzo became Husted and DeWine's choice.
"Sam Randazzo was an attorney who represented utilities, who represented consumers," Husted said. "He was in he was considered an industry expert."
Meyer said when it was clear Randazzo was the top candidate, FirstEnergy moved quickly to back him, pointing out behind-the-scenes connections the defendants had with Randazzo, like the $4 million bribe.
RELATED: 'They bought people' — Opening arguments begin in FirstEnergy corruption trial
Meyer tried to give the jury a picture of what kind of establishment the men met at. The ACC is basically a members-only country club without the golf course. It costs thousands of dollars to join, according to Capitol Square lobbyists. It has a wellness center, spa, bowling alley and even overnight rooms.
After Husted downplayed the fanciness of the club, Meyer noted the "wood panelling."
"It's not like Planet Fitness, or something like that?" Meyer asked Husted.
"I've never been in a Planet Fitness," Husted said, seriously, but received laughs.
Chaffee said that the prosecution was trying to show that they were being wooed.
Husted said he likely would not have supported Randazzo if he knew about FirstEnergy’s involvement.
"You wouldn't want Ohioans to think that the person your administration selected for the job of PUCO chair had secret financial relationships with one of these regulated utilities, would you?" Meyer asked Husted.
"I would not, and they should not," Husted responded.
"You wouldn't tolerate a chair compromised by secret financial dealings with the utility they regulate, would you?" he asked.
"I would not, and I'm sure the governor would not," the senator replied.
But we found some inconsistencies with Husted's testimony and public documents.
Discrepancies
For years, we have been uncovering the close ties between FirstEnergy and major political players. Our previous investigations have shown that FirstEnergy executives say that then-Lt. Gov. Husted worked closely with them to pass H.B. 6 in 2019, after they helped fund his campaign.
Click here to see considerably more texts about Husted and how he was allegedly leading the push for H.B. 6.
"There are inconsistencies between what he said and what some of the documents and investigative reporting have shown," Chaffee said.
Husted claimed to have no knowledge of Randazzo’s active relationship with FirstEnergy at that time, saying it hadn’t been disclosed to him. But he later referenced the 'Randazzo Dossier.'
"I recall that one of the other utilities had sent maybe a letter or something to the governor criticizing Sam Randazzo as a potential appointment," Husted said.
In a nearly 200-page document sent by a former colleague who then worked for American Electric Power, the dossier to Husted and DeWine stated, “PUCO applicant Sam Randazzo has opaque, undisclosed financial ties to FirstEnergy that should be fully examined and made public.” The document provided proof of financial, legal and business filings.
"If you find a document that provides pretty direct evidence to the contrary of what somebody testified, there is reason to consider the accuracy of the testimony offered by the witness," Chaffee said.
Husted also testified that he couldn’t recall how Randazzo’s name was brought up for the chair, but Randazzo testified in his 2019 Senate confirmation hearing that it was Husted who recruited him, according to a transcript of the meeting.
We asked for clarification from the senator’s team, but didn’t hear back.
Moving forward with fireworks
The defense is trying to get the case thrown out, reemphasizing their continued claim of prosecutorial misconduct by the state.
"You wouldn't want Ohioans to think that the person your administration selected for the job of PUCO chair had secret financial relationships with one of these regulated utilities, would you?" Meyer asked Husted.
Immediately, Grimes and Jones' attorney Carole Rendon burst into objections, with the latter calling the situation "unbelievable."
"To ask this witness if our clients should be held accountable for actions — that was a premeditated, planned out transgression," Grimes said. "It was intended to incite this jury; it was thought out. I've never seen anything like that judge. I mean, he knew exactly what he was doing, and he went for it, right across the line, jumped into it."
He couldn't fathom how Meyer would think that was appropriate. The judge seemed to agree, but gave Meyer the chance to respond.
"The witness's credibility was something that was at issue, and certainly I believe I had a right to explore those issues," Meyer said.
Judge Susan Baker Ross asked if, after everything Husted said in agreement with Meyer during the cross-examination, he really thought Husted could have been biased towards the defendants.
"Credibility goes to a whole host of issues," he responded.
Was it worth it to ask that divisive question? Chaffee said sure.
"[These questions] are not uncommon in regard to these types of trials," Chaffee said. "It's not uncommon to try and get witnesses to make the people who've called them look bad."
He understands why the judge shot it down and said it was smart of the defense to jump on it. He said Meyer's "behavior" could potentially be used in an appeal.
While Husted's testimony was mainly "unremarkable," Chaffee said, it still could hurt him politically.
"When you're trying to get elected, being associated with what's one of, if not the largest bribery scandal in the history of the state, it's something that's really kind of a bad look," Chaffee said.
Husted is now a candidate in one of the most closely watched Senate races this cycle.
A handful of protestors held signs outside the court in the pouring rain, with the basic message of "You're corrupt."
Follow WEWS statehouse reporter Morgan Trau on Twitter and Facebook.
