▶ 0:13:39-- committee on privacy, technology, and the law will come to order. Today we will be holding the first and what will be a series of judiciary committee hearings examining the corrupt arctic frost that targeted trump, duly elected members of congress, and thousands of conservatives across the country.
▶ 0:14:02Hearings will serve as a form of discovery for the committee as we continue to document and enter into the record all of the facts surrounding the arctic frost witch hunt. Let me be clear, we need jack smith before us under oath so that he can answer for his actions in this targeted, weaponized witch hunt.
▶ 0:14:25Ultimately we are here this morning because jack smith violated his oath of office, trampled on american rights that are enshrined in the constitution, all for one reason. To go after donald trump and conservatives across this great nation.
▶ 0:14:46With the biden doj approval, jack smith issued 197 subpoenas to over 430 conservative organizations and individuals. That was the length that he went to to go after donald trump. Jack smith took a page out of the old russian playbook by saying -- give me the man and I will give you the case against him.
▶ 0:15:16In this case, the man was president trump and hundreds of conservative americans who supported him. Luckily, we now have a commander-in-chief at the white house in president trump who is working every day to root out the two-tiered system of justice implemented under joe biden that allowed this political witch hunt to that targeted conservatives.
▶ 0:15:46Chairman grassley began his work to uncover these atrocities of this arctic frost investigation in 2022. Thanks to brave whistleblowers that have come forward, we have learned a lot. We know that just days after the president announced his 2024 campaign, jack smith was named special counsel.
▶ 0:16:11We know that jack smith was determined to persecute donald trump and hundreds of conservatives across america who support him. Relevant to our hearing today, we know that jack smith secretly subpoenaed the phone records of sitting U.S. senators and congressmen.
▶ 0:16:38Five members of this committee -- graham, lee, cruz, holly, and I had our phone records subpoenaed by smith, in addition to several other senators and members of the house. Jack smith did not stop there. He also made sure that we didn't find out about this deep invasion of our privacy, insuring that an obama appointee, judge james joe's burke -- judge bowes berg signed
▶ 0:17:09Nondisclosure orders attached to the subpoenas that had no basis in fact. His basis for the gag orders? That sitting members of congress would -- quoting directly from him -- result in destruction of evidence, intimidation of potential witnesses, and serious jeopardy to the investigation.
▶ 0:17:40Think about that. Sitting members of congress, that's what he thought. Additionally, we know that jack smith's corrupt team of prosecutors consulted with the biden doj public integrity section and concluded, essentially, that while there was some litigation risk related to the speech and debate clause, they could go ahead with the subpoenas regardless because the affected members of congress would never find out about the
▶ 0:18:12Invasion of privacy and violation of constitutional rights. So, they thought they could hide it. And that we would never know. Well, thanks to brave whistleblowers in chairman grassley's unflinching investigative work, we found out about the subpoenas. That is why we are holding the hearing today.
▶ 0:18:38This morning we will examine how each of these wireless carriers -- verizon, at&t, and t-mobile responded to the jack smith unlawful or illegal subpoenas. Specifically, we will look at the fact that verizon and t-mobile complied with jack smith's may 2023 subpoenas no questions asked.
▶ 0:19:01We will also hear from at&t, who in the case of senator cruz did raise speech and debate -- speech and debate clause concerns and pushed back against jack smith's demands despite previously producing the phone records of speaker kevin mccarthy and congressman chip roy.
▶ 0:19:21It's critical that each of these carriers go on the record about the decisions they made and why or why not they enabled and worked with jack smith's weaponization of government. I will close with this -- if this kind of invasion of privacy can happen to sitting members of congress and even the president of the united states, it can and probably will happen to all americans unless we stop it
▶ 0:19:51Right here. This was the worst weaponization of government in american history and I am determined to ensure that jack smith is held accountable to prevent another arctic frost from happening again. The american people deserve nothing less. Now I will turn to the chairman of the full committee, senator durbin, for his opening.
▶ 0:20:18Senator Durbin: Jack smith, where could he possibly be hiding? What is this man doing to avoid coming before the american people coming under oath? Let me tell you that there is a different story that is a reality. October 30 of last year, I sent a letter to chairman grassley in this committee and said let's bring jack smith before us under oath in public to answer these questions. He was ready. He volunteered to do it.
▶ 0:20:48Senator Durbin: The chairman didn't take advantage of it. The question that has been raised by senator blackburn is whether what we need to do to bring jack smith before us under oath. What you need to do is push the open door. He's already testified before the house committee, in private in that in public under oath, under penalty of perjury answering questions, the same ones you will be posed with today. He's not hiding. He's not avoiding this.
▶ 0:21:19Senator Durbin: He's ready to come testify under oath. You sent another letter saying bring him in, ask him directly the answers to these questions. For reasons not clear to me at all, we are here today to discuss jack smith's role in the legal procedure.
▶ 0:21:38Senator Durbin: A procedure created by congress and regularly deployed by federal prosecutors to collect the total records of people that donald trump contacted in his efforts to overturn the election of 2020. As a reminder, in 2020 donald trump spent months spreading the big lie that the election was stolen. Never any proof whatsoever of that fact. He pressured state election officials and members of congress to help overturn the results of the election.
▶ 0:22:08Senator Durbin: Have you seen the contortions the nominees have gone through when asked of the basic question who won the election in 2020? "well, joe biden was sworn in as president." who won the election question mark they won't answer it. They go through these painful contortions. They cannot answer it because it is an article of faith that if you are loyal to trump you never accept the premise that he lost an election and he did, he lost one in 2020.
▶ 0:22:38Senator Durbin: He pressured state election officials and there were recordings of that pressure. This culminated in the january 6 attack on the capital, where donald trump supporters tried to violently prevent the certification of the 2020 election. That same day, donald trump was on the phone, calling members of congress to solicit their aid in blocking certification. Special counsel jack smith investigated this criminal effort by donald trump to overturn the election.
▶ 0:23:08Senator Durbin: So, it's not surprising that Mr. smith subpoenaed the call records of those the president tried to listing his conspiracy. To the extent that the committee has questions about this, it should be former special counsel smith testifying as witness today before this committee. Not three telecom companies who responded to legally issued subpoenas.
▶ 0:23:32Senator Durbin: This morning the democratic members sent another letter to chairman grassley, renewing our request that the committee except special counsel smith possible offer to testify in public under oath. Unlike this committee, the house judiciary committee has already deposed Mr. smith, called into testify. Listen to what he said under oath about his investigation. He could be here saying the same thing today. Here's what he said in the house .
▶ 0:24:03Senator Durbin: "our investigation developed proof beyond a reasonable doubt that donald trump engaged in a criminal scheme to overturn the results of the 2020 election and prevent the lawful transfer of power. -- power." what about the records that republicans are calling for? "donald trump and his associates tried to call members of congress in furtherance of a criminal scheme, urging them to further delay certification of the 2020 election.
▶ 0:24:32Senator Durbin: I did not choose the members, donald trump did." whitewashing the donald trump attempts to overturn the election and january 6 attack, not addressing a single problem facing america, setting the stage for donald trump to understand -- interfere this year and the election.
▶ 0:24:55Senator Durbin: This is an embarrassing use of the committee's limited time, frankly, and I urge my colleagues to turn their attention to the threats that the president currently turns. Waging war on our own citizens, federal agents becoming a paramilitary force resting and threatening on multiple occasions now killing americans who oppose the president's mass deportation campaign.
▶ 0:25:25Senator Durbin: Last week a top truck -- top trump ally steve bannon gave away the endgame saying "we will have ice surrounding the polls and never again allow an election to be stolen." when asked about the comments, the press secretary said that she cannot guarantee that ice agents won't be near the poles. The goal is clear, intimidate americans so that they will not exercise their constitutional right to vote in november.
▶ 0:25:54Senator Durbin: Because otherwise the trump forces will lose the election. History is indeed repeating itself and we are closer to an election as donald trump is less popular than he has ever been. Instead of addressing the issues that the american people really care about, the president is doubling down schemes -- claims of election fraud to justify interfering in another election.
▶ 0:26:20Senator Durbin: Last month the fbi seized truckloads of election materials from fulton county, georgia, with tulsi gabbard inexplicably in tow. The attorney general and -- the attorney general demanded that the state of minnesota turn over voter rolls as a commission for the best condition for the withdrawal of ice from minnesota. The attorney for the state described it as a ransom note.
▶ 0:26:48Senator Durbin: Now donald trump is calling for republicans to take over voting. His plan to repeat his election subversion tactics could not be planner. The hope is that there is not violence yet again, but instead of responding republicans here show on dialing -- undying fealty to the president's abnormal behavior and attempt to whitewash history and make january 6 disappear.
▶ 0:27:18Senator Durbin: It won't work, we still have the videos.
▶ 0:27:20Sen. Blackburn: Chairman grassley, you are recognized for your opening.
▶ 0:27:26Senator Grassley: I would like to rebut what we just heard. It seems that my democratic colleagues aren't listening. I have already said that we would bring jack smith in for a public hearing. I would note that he has failed to answer my preliminary crisis I sent him last year.
▶ 0:27:51Senator Grassley: For example, did he or his staff use nongovernment devices for government work. Smith has also misled the committee already by saying that he did everything by the book and we know that's not true now. I think that senator blackburn -- I thank senator blackburn for her leadership of the subcommittee and this hearing.
▶ 0:28:17Senator Grassley: I will do the strong statement you already made, senator blackburn. Today is the first in a series of arctic frost hearings that have been authorized as chairman of the full committee. I started the arctic crossed investigation in july of 2020 two based on credible whistleblower disclosures.
▶ 0:28:40Senator Grassley: Those whistleblowers disclosed partisan bias in the genesis of the election case against trump and related allegations. I have always said that if you are going to open a politically charged investigation, it must be done in the right way.
▶ 0:29:02Senator Grassley: That partisan bias started with an fbi special agent in charge, it continued through jack smith's case. As I have shown through social media and emails, he was out to get trump.
▶ 0:29:29Senator Grassley: He violated fbi roles -- rules around the what -- along the way. He also valley -- violated the hatch act. Many years of investigation that resulted in thousands of records made public.
▶ 0:29:53Senator Grassley: I made public that it started in 25 with the tell's nomination hearing. Coming from brave whistleblowers. Other whistleblower disclosures to my office have helped this administration identify responsive records from the congress, probably records that the branch didn't even know they had to.
▶ 0:30:20Senator Grassley: The new york times has shamefully published a series of articles trying to undermine these whistleblowers. They have disgracefully accused them of violating the law while defending partisan agents and prosecutors who have been exposed for bad conduct.
▶ 0:30:45Senator Grassley: During this investigation senator johnson and I uncovered how jack smith massively expanded the election case. That's been a focus of the investigation. The improper investigation of jack smith's work. He didn't just target president trump. Jack smith issued hundreds of subpoenas targeting 400 republican organizations and individuals.
▶ 0:31:16Senator Grassley: Some of those subpoenas sought broad and extensive financial data from republican groups, communications with the media and the legislative branch. Communications relating to media companies including cbs, fox news, foxbusiness, newsmax, sinclair, and others. I think it is a worthy question, why haven't these media companies condemned these actions?
▶ 0:31:47Senator Grassley: Financial data relating to republican groups include the republican national committee, turning point usa, and hundreds of other organizations. These invasive efforts were spearheaded by partisan agents and prosecutors. Many have now been fired despite democratic complaining about it.
▶ 0:32:15Senator Grassley: It's more than reasonable to question why smith needed vast financial data, as well as what his partisan team would ultimately do with that data. It is worth noting that two of jack smith's partisan prosecutors, jp cooney and molly gaston, reportedly filed a complaint with the department of justice inspector general.
▶ 0:32:43Senator Grassley: The complaint was in response to whistleblowers providing me the 197 subpoenas that targeted over 400 republican groups and individuals. They both reportedly wrongfully asserted my whistleblowers broke the law, broke it -- breaking the law by knowing the whistle.
▶ 0:33:09Senator Grassley: Today dedication that my perceptive transparency far outweighs improper efforts to silence them by these two rogue prosecutors. In light of jack smith and his team's partisan efforts to chill whistleblowers and aggressively seek sensitive information related to republican groups and individuals, their efforts to target republican members data is even more questionable.
▶ 0:33:41Senator Grassley: To that point, on december 10 of last year, I released several emails. The emails show that smith's team was warned that subpoenaing congressional information could violate the speech and debate clause of the constitution. They were warned that legislators may intervene and oppose the process.
▶ 0:34:08Senator Grassley: In this case, my colleagues cannot intervene because smith and his team successfully obtained nondisclosure orders, keeping everything top-secret. Smith and his team irresponsibly steamrolled ahead while intentionally hiding their activities from members of congress.
▶ 0:34:28Senator Grassley: Since october 9 of last year, this committee has sought information from phone companies about jack smith's effort to obtain congressional information. My and senator johnson's investigative teams have also provided those companies with additional search terms to get to the bottom of the matter.
▶ 0:34:49Senator Grassley: To date, t-mobile has identified a subpoena for toll records from senator lee's personal phones, at&t initially asserted information to jack smith relating to any member of congress. In november of last year at&t amended its answer because they did respond to a subpoena relating to the former speaker of the house, kevin mccarthy.
▶ 0:35:18Senator Grassley: Regarding verizon, two members targeted by jack smith were associated with the associated phone lines on may of 22. 2022. The senate entered into a contract with verizon.
▶ 0:35:37Senator Grassley: That contract created an affirmative notification requirement for senate devices, meaning that under the contract verizon was required to notify the senate sergeant at arms when member's offices was subject to a subpoena.
▶ 0:35:55Senator Grassley: According to the senate sergeant at arms, these terms applied to may 25 of 2023 including two senate lines, one of them for senator cruz, the other for senator graham. Verizon failed to perform the notification requirement.
▶ 0:36:18Senator Grassley: Under questioning by my staff, verizon said they didn't have the infrastructure in place to know whether a congressional number was subpoenaed until february of last year. The federal statute also says that a carrier shall not be barred from providing notice to a senate office about a subpoena . Today verizon, at&t, and t-mobile will have a chance to explain themselves.
▶ 0:36:48Senator Grassley: Today, my and senator johnson's oversight of these companies has identified verizon, at&t, and t-mobile received at least 84 arctic crossed or jack smith related subpoenas. At least 10 are related to current, former or current republican members of congress.
▶ 0:37:14Senator Grassley: So, smith's deceitful conduct was a substantial intrusion into the core constitutional activities of constitutional officers. If this happened to my democratic colleagues, they would be as rightly outraged as we republicans are. My work will continue, because transparency brings accountability. Thank you.
▶ 0:37:36Sen. Blackburn: Thank you, Mr. chairman. Thank you to our witnesses for being here today. For each of you, a brief introduction and then we will get to your openings. Mr.
▶ 0:37:50Sen. Blackburn: Chris miller serves as senior vp and general counsel for verizon, where he is responsible for the verizon legal team supporting supply chain sourcing transactions, artificial intelligence, information technology, data analytics, real estate deals, and emerging solutions.
▶ 0:38:11Sen. Blackburn: Prior to joining verizon, he was a lawyer in private practice and earned his bachelors from iowa state university and his jd from the university of michigan. Mr. michael romano was a deputy chief of staff at oh c section -- of c section of the district attorney's office of corruption and now works in private practice. Mr.
▶ 0:38:40Sen. Blackburn: Romano received a law degree from washington university in st. Louis and bachelors of political science from notre dame and now teaches trial advocacy at american university. Mr.
▶ 0:38:55Sen. Blackburn: Martin nelson currently -- mark nelson currently serves at t-mobile overseeing legal and government affairs linking their -- and leads the legal strategy team, joining t-mobile in 2021 after 25 years at the law firm cleary got late, where he specialized in mergers and antitrust and has been recognized as one of the national antitrust lawyers leading the nation, earning a
▶ 0:39:26Sen. Blackburn: Law degree from harvard and is a member of the bar in washington state, new york, and washington, D.C. dan schwager Mr. -- Mr. dan schwager was the general counsel for the secretary of the senate from 21, 2011 to 13, he was the chief counsel and staff director at the house -- house ethics
▶ 0:39:58Sen. Blackburn: Committee and served as counsel to house ethics committee from 2009 to 2011 and was a trial attorney in the public integrity section of 2003 to 2009 with a jd from the nyu school of law, ba and ethical theory from bates college. Mr.
▶ 0:40:16Sen. Blackburn: David mcatee is the senior executive vp and general counsel at at&t, where he is responsible for all legal matters at the company and was appointed general counsel in 2015 after joining in 2012 as senior vp and assistant general counsel.
▶ 0:40:37Sen. Blackburn: Prior to at&t, he was a partner at hanks and boone, specializing in complex litigation matters, antitrust government investigations. He earned a bachelor's from duke and his jd from university of texas school of law. I want to ask each of you to stand, raise your right hand, and be sworn in.
▶ 0:40:59Sen. Blackburn: Do you swear or affirm that the testimony you are about to give to this committee is the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth? All have affirmed their commitment. Mr. miller, we will begin with you for your testimony.
▶ 0:41:18Mr. Miller: Chairman, ranking member durbin, members of the subcommittee, my name is chris miller and I'm the senior vice president and general counsel for the verizon consumer group and I appreciate the opportunity to be here today.
▶ 0:41:39Mr. Miller: I want to acknowledge the concerns raised by members and those of you here today over the subpoenas and nondisclosure orders issued in 2023 and the responses we provided. We were compelled to provide this information under the law and complied. No matter the subject of the subpoena, we cannot ignore a valid legal demand or court order.
▶ 0:42:04Mr. Miller: Our processes could have been better suited to meet what was a new and unique set of circumstances for us and for other companies. We have put new processes in place to increase transparency to new members whose information is sought by law enforcement, allowing the member to take the necessary actions to assert their rights and privileges.
▶ 0:42:27Mr. Miller: We have been working closely with congress and the administration for the past few months to address the important issues raised by this committee's inquiry. Let me provide a context and a timeline for the events. I will discuss the new procedures put in place when law enforcement service verizon with the legal process involving a member of congress. Congress has long recognized that telecom carriers have access to information that can help law enforcement.
▶ 0:42:57Mr. Miller: We respect valid law enforcement requests and have historically not inquired about the substance of their investigations. Verizon processes 300,000 legal demands and urgent inquiries from public safety officials each year. We are required to respond to these requests for information promptly, sometimes in real time.
▶ 0:43:22Mr. Miller: Beginning in late 2022, verizon received multiple federal grand jury subpoenas from the former special counsel's office. Some of these subpoenas are related to the arctic crossed investigation and requested records associated with specific telephone numbers. One subpoena demanded subscriber information and call detail records for 12 telephone numbers between january 4 and january 7 at 2021.
▶ 0:43:51Mr. Miller: That subpoena only listed telephone numbers and did not include names or any other information identifying these numbers as belonging to members. At that time, we didn't have a process in place to identify and escalate numbers belonging to members before we responded. We now know that some of those numbers were associated with members of congress. These were personal lines, campaign minds.
▶ 0:44:22Mr. Miller: A judge issued a nondisclosure order preventing us from issuing this request to anyone including those identified in the subpoena. As was the practice at the teeth -- the time, we determined that they were valid and legal. As a result, we responded to the subpoena and produced call detail records for the lines. These were unprecedented circumstances and while we fully complied with the law, we acknowledge we could have done better in terms of our process.
▶ 0:44:52Mr. Miller: One year ago, we began working with the senate sergeant at arms on changes to the handling of legal demands for official deadlines and have expanded those changes to include personal and campaign models. Here's what we are doing.
▶ 0:45:08Mr. Miller: First, for law enforcement requests related to members, we will ensure that verizon senior leadership is notified and consulted before information is disclosed, allowing for informed and thoughtful decision making at the highest levels of the company. Second, before producing records, we will contact law enforcement officials to verify that they in fact intend to seek records for a member telephone number.
▶ 0:45:35Mr. Miller: Third, we will notify the member of the law enforcement request to the fullest extent provided by law. If we receive a nondisclosure order preventing notice, we will challenge it in court. This will a coif -- require coordination with the house and senate to make sure we know which numbers are covered and we have also met with the white house counsel's office and are working with them on a similar process for the administration.
▶ 0:46:04Mr. Miller: Verizon is committed to getting this right. We have worked closely with the congressional committees investigating the matter is and will continue to cooperate with you examine the issues. I look forward to your questions. Thank you.
▶ 0:46:18Sen. Blackburn: Mr. romano, you are recognized.
▶ 0:46:27Mr. Romano: Thank you for this opportunity to testify on arctic frost and the collection of records. It is an honor to speak with you today. My name is michael romano, attorney and the justice department for almost 18 years. Immediately before my resignation, I was deputy for the c section in washington, D.C., and it was a great privilege to serve the U.S.
▶ 0:46:52Mr. Romano: By prosecuting crimes committed during the violent riot at the U.S. capitol and january 6. When I first learned of its -- this hearing, I was surprised, because as from my perspective is a long serving federal prosecutor, there is nothing remotely scandalous or controversial about the collection of toll records. Toll records show that a phone number called another phone number, when the call was placed, and how long it lasted.
▶ 0:47:20Mr. Romano: They do not include content, they do not capture conversations, voicemails, or text messages. When the special counsel's office collected toll records, they did not gain access to thoughts or private discussions, only to the fact that calls happened. Subpoenas for toll records are routine and criminal investigations, especially when they involve conspiracy and obstruction of justice.
▶ 0:47:46Mr. Romano: Both of those crimes turn heavily on intent, making communications especially important. In such cases investigators and prosecutors often seek to understand who the target of the investigation spoke with, when, and for how long, and investigators and prosecutors may seek to understand who they spoke with even if those others are not suspected of any criminal wrongdoing.
▶ 0:48:13Mr. Romano: Nondisclosure orders are also routine and it is also best practice for investigations to be conducted as covertly as possible, which is especially important when there are concerns of tampering, witness intimidation, or attempts by key parties to get together and agree on a story, which based on what I know of the election interference case, was a real concern.
▶ 0:48:34Mr. Romano: After all, critical witnesses, which may have included some of you senators, and your colleagues and staff, did have their lives threatened on january 6 by supporters of the president. This collection of toll records was not weaponization. It was not weaponization period, much less the worse of the government in american history. It was not a witch hunt. It was not a pretext to harm political opponents.
▶ 0:49:02Mr. Romano: If it was any of those things, the special counsel would have used this information against you somehow. As I understand it, that didn't happen. Based on what I know, his office followed department policy in the collection of evidence, safeguarded it and kept it confidential as I would expect any federal prosecutor to do. I understand that some of you had your toll records collected and are not happy about that, that's understandable. Nobody enjoys having the government collect their information.
▶ 0:49:32Mr. Romano: Apart from that unhappiness, you were not harmed. Indeed, given the gravity of the election interference case, the special counsel needed to investigate fulsome lay. Remember what we were dealing with after january 6. The capital had been ransacked by a violent mob.
▶ 0:49:50Mr. Romano: Throughout the grounds and building, police officers were assaulted, punched, kicked, tackled, spat on, battered with poles, hit with chairs, crushed indoors, blasted with pepper spray, bear spray, shocked with stun guns.
▶ 0:50:04Mr. Romano: Riders stormed the building and caused millions of dollars in damage to the seat of our government and try to overturn the results of the election by force and threat of force installed preferred candidate despite the outcome and in the process, your lives and the lives of staff members and officers who protected you were put in danger. There were no small crimes on january 6 of 2021. I have heard the criticism that misdemeanor defendants accused of trespass were treated too harshly and I strongly disagree with it.
▶ 0:50:35Mr. Romano: The people who trespassed at the capitol and committed disorderly behavior enable the mob violence. Without that volume of people, less violence would have been committed and lest damage would have been done. As one judge observed commenting on these cases, every raindrop contributes to a flood and based on the evidence I reviewed, many misdemeanor offenses understood what they were accomplishing and they meant to achieve the same goals as those who used violence.
▶ 0:51:04Mr. Romano: The crimes committed on january 6 demanded to be investigated. Working as a part of the capitol siege section of prosecuting riders and having a role in leading the effort was the apex of my work at the justice department and the most righteous case and effort I have ever been a part of with the finest team of investigators, prosecutors, and staff I have worked with, including people who would go on to serve the special counsel's office.
▶ 0:51:32Mr. Romano: The president's role in the election interference case deserves to be investigated.
▶ 0:51:38Senator: Madam chairman, madam chairman, can you ask the witnesses not to filibuster us into friday.
▶ 0:51:44Sen. Blackburn: Gladly. Mr. nelson, you are recognized. Five minutes.
▶ 0:51:50Mr. Nelson: Thank you. Chair blackburn, ranking member klobuchar, members of the subcommittee, thank you for the opportunity to appear here before you today. My name is mark nelson and on the general counsel for t-mobile. We are headquartered in bellevue, washington and is the second-largest provider of wireless communications services in the U.S.
▶ 0:52:13Mr. Nelson: Over the years we have transformed the wireless industry by delivering libel coverage and focusing on customers, challenging industry norms. Through our signature initiatives we have eliminated annual service contracts, overage fees, and unpredictable international roaming charges on tackling other customer pain points while delivering award-winning customer service. We are proud to connect communities large and small, urban and rural across every region of the country.
▶ 0:52:43Mr. Nelson: Our mission has remained constant, replace complexity and limited options with transparency, flexibility, and meaningful customer benefits. As a provider of essential communications services we understand the critical importance of data privacy, cybersecurity, and public safety, investing heavily in these areas maintaining rigorous internal processes to make sure that we meet all rigorous requirements and uphold the highest standards of integrity.
▶ 0:53:11Mr. Nelson: When we receive valid demands from government entities, we respond as required by law, with customer privacy at the top of mind. T-mobile receives an enormous volume of law enforcement demands and legal process relating to subscriber records. In 2020 four alone we responded to 500 82,000 legal demands from government entities, including subpoenas for toll records, warrants, register, and trap and trace orders.
▶ 0:53:40Mr. Nelson: We respond to these demands consistent with legal obligations and make publicly available our annual transparency reports on these various types of legal demands for customer information to be received. For all law enforcement demands we comply following our standard legal review procedures consistent with our obligation to protect customer privacy while satisfying our legal obligations under this sort of communications act and other relevant statutes and regulations.
▶ 0:54:09Mr. Nelson: For all carriers, by design law enforcement does not provide information on the underlying investigations motivating the request and in the overwhelming majority of law enforcement demands that we receive we do not provide target identifiers, just telephone numbers, limiting our ability to connect responsive records with specific individuals.
▶ 0:54:30Mr. Nelson: When we received subpoenas from jack smith's office, none of which sought records for senate official business lines, the team treated them as we would any other subpoena, responding consistent with our obligations under the law. That said, t-mobile is always open to ways to improve our internal processes and over the past year we've worked closely with the senate sergeant at arms to ensure that applicable requirements are implemented efficiently and transparently.
▶ 0:55:02Mr. Nelson: The t-mobile legal emergency response team under my direction is continuing to evaluate and strengthen our internal processes to ensure legal compliance and adequate notice is provided. I joined t-mobile in 2021 because of their mission and culture and commitment to challenging the status quo reflecting my own values. T-mobile operates with a spirit of innovation and integrity and I am proud to be a part of an organization shaping the future of connectivity while holding itself to the highest standards.
▶ 0:55:33Mr. Nelson: Thank you for the opportunity to provide testimony today and I look forward to your questions.
▶ 0:55:40Sen. Blackburn: Thank you. Mr. schwager, you are recognized.
▶ 0:55:47Mr. Schwager: Members of the committee, thank you for allowing me to speak with you today. My name is dan schwager and I've been asked to testify on politically sensitive investigation toll collection. Based on my experience and perspectives as a former corruption prosecutor, I'm not speaking on behalf of my current or any former employer.
▶ 0:56:11Mr. Schwager: Today I hope to share my perspective on how common it is to obtain these records and nondisclosure orders regarding them and thorough investigations of complex matters and how obtaining such records and orders does not indicate something nefarious about either the owner of the phone or the investigator seeking the records and how any investigation into political figures is at risk of being called political, but that regular and thorough investigative steps are not
▶ 0:56:41Mr. Schwager: Political actions themselves. I have also been a fierce defender, nonpartisan defender, of the prerogatives of the legislative branch and its protection from a potentially abusive and retributive executive branch. I agree that the speech or debate clause needs serious attention, debate, and even more legislation, but my training and experience teach me that reasonable disagreements between executive and legislative branches over interpreting law are not evidence of improper motives or misconduct.
▶ 0:57:11Mr. Schwager: I went to law school for a passion on ethics and integrity in government and on the flipside, countering corruption. I found that to be an absolutely nonpartisan concern. I have worked in the executive and legislative branches for and with republicans and democrats of great integrity and ethical compass. I have investigated and seen prosecuted public officials on both sides of the aisle who have breached the public trust.
▶ 0:57:40Mr. Schwager: An investigation of corruption or fraud should look roughly the same, no matter who the target is. Unfortunately, political attacks on nonpartisan investigations often sound roughly the same as well. I have personally been described as a tool of the right and a tool of the left, once even in the same case.
▶ 0:58:02Mr. Schwager: Throughout my career as a corruption prosecutor, I have learned the value of what we call blood and toll with subpoenas for the non-content phone records of subjects and witnesses, records scoured for relevant information to help fill out the understanding of the facts, sought regardless of whether they may be inculpatory or exculpatory, but to understand the facts.
▶ 0:58:24Mr. Schwager: In my career, toll records have led to the complete exoneration of a public official framed for serious corruption. These are very different from wiretaps or other content searches, because both the supreme court and congress have recognized that seeking noncontent data such as toll records from third-party processors is simply a lower fourth amendment concern than a wiretap or other forms of seeking the content of communications.
▶ 0:58:54Mr. Schwager: Nondisclosure orders are commonly warranted and sought in the basis for seeking them is not necessarily that the owner of the phone may jeopardize an investigation themselves, but that intimidation, destruction of evidence may occur if the subpoena became public to others. People brazen and dishonest enough to commit acts of significant corruption or fraud are often brazen enough to try to hide the evidence or intimidate witnesses.
▶ 0:59:22Mr. Schwager: It should not be surprising that credible allegations of serious misconduct might warrant a nondisclosure order. To be clear, the search for an seizure of information by the government implicates the constitutional rights of all people in the united states. When the legislative branch is involved, additional important constitutional concerns and checks and balances are implicated.
▶ 0:59:46Mr. Schwager: The interpretation of which have long been reasonably debated between the executive and legislative branches and only sometimes settled by the courts. A reasonable disagreement does not equal improper conduct. In summary, the tremendous weight of nonpartisan public evidence regarding the serious and violent events and alleged fraud around january 6 card for a thorough and honest investigation in the interest of the american public.
▶ 1:00:14Mr. Schwager: The evidence at issue in this hearing, the particular noncontent phone records, might have been a tiny fraction of the vast picture of those events, but the use of telephone toll records in a nondisclosure order appeared to me to be consistent with a typical nonpartisan objective and thorough investigation.
▶ 1:00:34Mr. Schwager: No person or investigation is perfect, but cries of partisanship over normal investigative tactics even with normal disagreements on the application of speech and debate appear to be overstated and risk further needlessly exacerbating instead of mitigating parts of american law enforcement. Thank you.
▶ 1:00:53Sen. Blackburn: Mr. mcatee, you are recognized.
▶ 1:00:57Mr. Mcatee: Thank you. Ranking members, thank you for the opportunity to be here this morning. I am the at&t general counsel. Every year, at&t receives hundreds of thousands of legal demands and with each, our professional team strives to act according to three important principles, protecting the privacy of our customers, following the law, exercising sound professional judgment. Our processes are rooted in these principles.
▶ 1:01:27Mr. Mcatee: So is our culture. In my written testimony, I explained to the processes of at&t and would now like to spend my limited time focusing on how we believe our culture works hand in glove with our process to deliver better results for our customers. At at&t it starts with the customer and we learned long ago that we serve customers better working together than in silos. To deliver best customer service, you must collaborate across departments, sharing information to make better informed decisions.
▶ 1:01:59Mr. Mcatee: We call it winning is one. I share this because it is the combination of process and culture that best explains how at&t handled the grand jury subpoenas that we received from jack smith's special counsel office. Late in 2022 our global demand center began to receive grand jury subpoenas from that office and in each case, professionals reviewed the subpoena according to the process outlined in my written testimony.
▶ 1:02:28Mr. Mcatee: In each case, the team determined the subpoena was valid and compulsory, meaning that we were required by law to provide the information requested and in each case the team determined that each was subject to a nondisclosure order meaning that we were legally obligated not to tell anyone about the subpoena. Sitting here today, we know that our team was one hundred percent correct in both determinations. To their credit, they did more.
▶ 1:02:58Mr. Mcatee: After receiving and responding to several special counsel subpoenas as required by law, the subpoena team reached out to my lawyers too discussed what is clearly becoming a series of requests from the same office. In simple terms, the subpoena to center did something central to our culture of collaboration, they raised their hand when they saw something out of the ordinary and when they did, our legal team intervened using its best professional judgment in two important ways.
▶ 1:03:28Mr. Mcatee: First, our lawyers and struck at the office of special counsel to direct all future subpoenas to the legal department, not the subpoena center. Second, when our lawyers received a subpoena, if it requested information on campaign accounts of two sitting members of congress, they did what I believe is always fair game, they asked a question.
▶ 1:03:52Mr. Mcatee: My lawyer's email has been produced, but for the purposes here today I will share exactly what she wrote to the office of special counsel. First, she identified the potential constitutional issue, saying "the users of the telephone numbers potentially indicate the protections of the speech or debate clause.
▶ 1:04:13Mr. Mcatee: Then she asked a critical question, asking for special counsel's view of the potential constitutional implications "so that at&t may document special counsel views and incorporate them as a part of our analysis." the special counsel's office never responded to that email, at least not substantively, and ultimately the office abandoned the subpoena and no records were produced.
▶ 1:04:39Mr. Mcatee: At the end of the day, all telecommunication companies are subject to the same laws and are comprised of human beings like me who can always do better. But in this case, as at&t's general counsel, I'm pleased to share how our team endeavored to combine process and culture to serve our customers better. I look forward to your questions.
▶ 1:05:04Sen. Blackburn: Thank you. We will begin our round of questioning. I will open. We will each have five minutes to question you. Mr. miller, I want to come to you. Are you aware of the debate, the speech and debate clause in article one?
▶ 1:05:22Mr. Miller: Yes.
▶ 1:05:23Sen. Blackburn: Ok. Are you aware of the D.C. circuit judge case "U.S. versus rayburn house office building?
▶ 1:05:36Mr. Miller: I'm not an expert, but I have heard of that case.
▶ 1:05:39Sen. Blackburn: You have heard of it and then you know that it stands for the proposition that there is a documentary nondisclosure privilege for members of congress. So, do you think that jack smith violated that speech and debate clause protection?
▶ 1:05:59Mr. Miller: Chairman blackburn, I would defer to you and your colleagues about the scope and application of the speech -- in
▶ 1:06:06Light Sen. Blackburn: You are aware of the case and are aware of what the case found, that it establishes the proposition?
▶ 1:06:16Mr. Miller: I am.
▶ 1:06:18Sen. Blackburn: So, do you think in your opinion that jack smith violated the speech and debate clause?
▶ 1:06:25Mr. Miller: Chairman, I do not know. I'm unaware of any case that addresses whether the speech or debate clause --
▶ 1:06:33Sen. Blackburn: Ok, so then why did you turn over the tolling data, if you are aware of the article one the speech and debate clause and you are aware of the case, why did you do this?
▶ 1:06:45Mr. Miller: I understand the frustration on the issue, chairman. We responded to the subpoena, principally the may 25 2020 --
▶ 1:06:56Sen. Blackburn: Even though you knew it was wrong?
▶ 1:06:58Mr. Miller: No, chairman, we did not know it was wrong.
▶ 1:07:02Sen. Blackburn: I've got a question on something in your testimony, I'm quoting you. "our processes could have been better suited to fit a new and unique set of circumstances." so, I'm glad that you all, it is heartening to hear that you realized you didn't have the right processes in place. But I want to make sure I am understanding what you meant by that.
▶ 1:07:30Sen. Blackburn: So, basically what you are saying is that it took jack smith issuing secret subpoenas for the records of duly elected members of congress as a part of a weaponized investigation of donald trump for verizon to finally realize that it probably could have, quoting you, "better processes." is that accurate?
▶ 1:07:54Mr. Miller: Chairman blackburn, we should have had a better process to address the situation.
▶ 1:08:00Sen. Blackburn: In essence what you are saying is that you had no process in place as of may of 2023. And you had no way of identifying that something was a member of congress records. Is that accurate?
▶ 1:08:19Mr. Miller: Correct, chairman.
▶ 1:08:22Sen. Blackburn: That you had no process in place. Therefore, you turned everything over. No process. You turned it over and are aware of the speech and debate clause and are aware of the U.S. versus rayburn house office meeting and you didn't comply with that.
▶ 1:08:52Sen. Blackburn: So, in judge bo's bird's nondisclosure over -- order that accompanied the subpoena, he stated that there were "reasonable grounds" to conclude that notifying me or the other members of the subpoena would result in destruction of or tampering with evidence, intimidation of potential witnesses, and serious jeopardy.
▶ 1:09:16Sen. Blackburn: Are you aware of any facts and were you aware at the time of any facts that justified him claiming that there were reasonable grounds that me or any of us would commit a federal crime by destroying evidence?
▶ 1:09:33Mr. Miller: Chairman blackburn, I have no reason to believe that you or anyone else on the panel would do any of those things. When we evaluated the subpoena and the nondisclosure order, we were simply looking to determine if they were valid and legal and in this case, they were.
▶ 1:09:50Sen. Blackburn: It never cause you to ask what this is about or why they would do this? Why didn't you reach out, like at&t did?
▶ 1:09:59Mr. Miller: I don't want to speak for my colleagues -- fellow panelists at at&t, but I would say that was a good catch --
▶ 1:10:08Sen. Blackburn: I didn't ask you to speak for them. I asked why you did not take an action. And you did not. My time has expired. Senator durbin, you are recognized for five minutes.
▶ 1:10:21Sen. Durbin: I want to try to get some basics understood here. Mr. nelson, you testified that you had 582,000 demands on your company, t-mobile, by government similar to the situation?
▶ 1:10:42Mr. Nelson: Correct.
▶ 1:10:43Sen. Durbin: Is the same thing true for at&t? >> hundreds of thousands, yes. >> hundreds of thousands.
▶ 1:10:51Sen. Durbin: Under this situation, as I understand it, Mr. romano says toll records show that a phone number called another phone number, when the call was placed, how long it lasted. They do not include content, they do not capture conversations, voicemails, or text messages. Is that accurate as far as you know? >> yes. >> yes. >> yes.
▶ 1:11:17Sen. Durbin: Can I ask you this -- who disclosed the names of the parties, the nine individuals associated with those telephone numbers? Did your company do any of that, Mr. miller?
▶ 1:11:32Mr. Miller: The subpoenas, when they came in they did not act -- include the names associated with those numbers and we have since disclosed of those names to the committee.
▶ 1:11:41Sen. Durbin: To who? >> to this committee.
▶ 1:11:45Sen. Durbin: Mr. nelson?
▶ 1:11:49Mr. Nelson: None of those were t-mobile customers, those nine original names. >> same answer with respect to at&t, senator.
▶ 1:11:58Sen. Durbin: I hope that you understand that from our perspective as politicians and elected officials that merely associating a name with an investigation raises a political concern. I share it with my colleagues. I value my privacy, may be more than most, because I have so little in public life and I want to make sure that it is not overrun with the few guardrails that still remain.
▶ 1:12:24Sen. Durbin: In this circumstance, I understand that there was a meeting with representatives of congress, maybe the senate, to change this procedure in the future. Mr. miller, were you a party to that negotiation?
▶ 1:12:37Mr. Miller: I am aware of those negotiations, senator. We do have a new process for something like this in the future.
▶ 1:12:44Sen. Durbin: What has changed?
▶ 1:12:46Mr. Miller: If we receive a subpoena for a member of congress, we will do several things. Escalate it internally, address the subpoena with the issuing law enforcement agency, and if there is an attached nondisclosure order, we will challenge it in court.
▶ 1:13:04Sen. Durbin: What is the nature of this change question mark a change in the law, a change by way of agreement? How is it enforceable?
▶ 1:13:13Mr. Schwager: -- Mr. miller: a change by way of agreement with the senate sergeant at arms.
▶ 1:13:20Sen. Durbin: But what you were doing in this case was complying with the existing law at the time, correct?
▶ 1:13:27Mr. Miller: That's correct.
▶ 1:13:29Sen. Durbin: Mr. nelson, were you party to that new arrangement?
▶ 1:13:34Mr. Nelson: We have adjusted our processes. Congress has change the law that's been repealed but on a voluntary basis we are continuing to work with the sergeant at arms to make similar changes to what you heard from my colleagues at verizon.
▶ 1:13:47Sen. Durbin: Mr. maca t?
▶ 1:13:50Mr. Nelson: We have those
▶ 1:13:52Congress -- Mr. Schwager: -- Mr. venkatesh ven we will always be striving o improve our process.
▶ 1:14:01Sen. Durbin: Any thoughts on the speech and debate because referred to there? Mr. romano?
▶ 1:14:08Mr. Romano: Specifically familiar
▶ 1:14:11Mr. Romano: Specifically familiah
▶ 1:14:11Mr. Romano: Specifically familiae case that senator blackburn raised. The idea that there is a protection in place for congressional documents seems to be different than the idea of toll records being protected by the speech clause. There may or may not be a specific case, but I don't know.
▶ 1:14:28Sen. Durbin: What was your role on january 6, Mr. schwager?
▶ 1:14:32Mr. Schwager: On january 6, I was the general counsel to the secretary of the senate.
▶ 1:14:38Sen. Durbin: Were you engaged in any work that day relative to the demonstration at the capitol?
▶ 1:14:45Mr. Schwager: Ranking member durbin, I am a little hesitant to speak on behalf of my former employers. I have not been authorized to do that. I can tell you that I was here with you all and I was doing my work on that day with you all in the senate chamber and the house chamber and the buildings.
▶ 1:15:04Sen. Durbin: Thank you, madam chairman.
▶ 1:15:07Chair Blackburn: Senator graham.
▶ 1:15:09Sen. Graham: Thank you very much. Number one observation, if the shoe were on the other foot, it would be front page news all over the world that republicans went after sitting democratic senators's phone records. It would be news all over the world that 490 democratic -- 430 democratic organizations had 197 subpoenas issued by some right-wing prosecutor.
▶ 1:15:36Sen. Graham: And the cavalier attitude that some of you have, well, nothing really bad here happened, I disagree. Fundamentally disagree. If you ever had a doubt about where the media is at and where our friends are our friends a on the other side are at, this should bring us together but apparently it will not. I do think I deserved what happened to me. Mr. schwager, were you there on january 6?
▶ 1:16:01Mr. Schwager: I was with you all.
▶ 1:16:02Sen. Graham: You hear my floor speech?
▶ 1:16:04Mr. Schwager: I don't recall.
▶ 1:16:06Sen. Graham: You should read it because I said, let's end this thing. So to verizon, you had a contract with the senate. Is that correct? >> that is correct, senator.
▶ 1:16:16Sen. Graham: That was in 2022.
▶ 1:16:19Mr. Miller: We have had a contract with the senate communication services.
▶ 1:16:23Sen. Graham: The last one I saw was 2022. How much money was that contract worth?
▶ 1:16:27Mr. Miller: I don't know, senator.
▶ 1:16:29Sen. Graham: Would you say tens of millions of dollars?
▶ 1:16:32Mr. Miller: It could become a senator.
▶ 1:16:34Sen. Graham: . Contract had a clause in it that if someone went after a senator's phone records, you would tell us so we can defend ourselves. Was that a contract? -- was that a condition of the contract?
▶ 1:16:49Mr. Miller: Senator, the --
▶ 1:16:51Sen. Graham: It was. This is what you sent jack smith about my official. It says united states senate sergeant at arms account. So you should have been alerted that this was the sergeant at arm's. You have a contract obligation to the sergeant of arms. The other one is my campaign phone. My personal phone and my official. This is team graham.
▶ 1:17:25Sen. Graham: Anyway, at the time of 2023, when they made their request about information requesting team graham and my official phone records, we were unable to find out that it was me. Is that your testimony? You did not know it involved me?
▶ 1:17:47Mr. Miller: Senator, the analysts responding to that --
▶ 1:17:52Sen. Graham: Did they say they did not know it was me? Is that fair to say?
▶ 1:17:56Mr. Miller: I don't know.
▶ 1:17:57Sen. Graham: You have to enter that because you have a contract to protect us. And you don't have anything in place to find out if we are being asked by the executive branch? You got all that money, and you did nothing to earn that money because would you agree the system failed me because I was not notified and you gave my information to the special counsel?
▶ 1:18:22Mr. Miller: Senator, I would certainly agree we have frustrated you.
▶ 1:18:26Sen. Graham: No, you failed me. You failed to honor the contract protecting all of us. Do you realize section 2 usc 6628 says it's an office shall not be barred through operation of any court order or any statutory provision from notifying the senate of any legal process? Mr. mcatee, david, you are familiar with that, right?
▶ 1:18:54Mr. Mcatee: Yes.
▶ 1:18:55Sen. Graham: When you found out it was senator cruz, you went to bat for senator cruz.
▶ 1:19:00Mr. Mcatee: We asked the question.
▶ 1:19:02Sen. Graham: And they backed down and folded like a cheap suit.they never pushed, never went to court.
▶ 1:19:08Mr. Mcatee: Never followed up.
▶ 1:19:10Sen. Graham: Because they were on a fishing expedition. If any of you challenged these guys, they would have gone away. The senate give you tens of millions of dollars and I have been a customer for a very long time. What about the 430 public in groups? What about the 197 subpoenas? We are not going to give up on this. This is a major breakdown.
▶ 1:19:37Sen. Graham: A major breakdown of protecting people you have a contractual of the kitchen to protect, and I think the biggest weaponization of the law but that is yet to be determined. Here is what I want you to know. If you contract for a service, you need to provide that service. If you cannot provide it, you let your customer down. The system gave you all the discussion you needed, and you did not use it, and if you have used it, at&t tells you what you got.
▶ 1:20:06Sen. Graham: How much more information do you need to know about me when it says team graham, senate sergeant at arms? The subpoena. The subpoena language. This is beyond offensive. Mr. miller, do I have control of verizon's records? Are they in my control?
▶ 1:20:27Mr. Miller: , senator at that time, we had a different view.
▶ 1:20:32Sen. Graham: The answer is no, I do not have my own records. You have it. How am I going to tamper with evidence I don't have? This finding is offensive. What happened shall never happen again, and the only way we will get to the bottom of it is hold people equitable to fulfill their contractual obligations and use common sense to protect a republic that depends on separation of powers, which was obliterated here. Thank you.
▶ 1:20:57Chair Blackburn: Senator klobuchar.
▶ 1:20:59Sen. Klobuchar: Thank you. Thank you. We recently observed in the fifth anniversary of the horrible events on january 6. Rather than honoring those who protected our democracy, unfortunately the white house released a website describing those who were convicted of crimes on january 6 as political prisoners. Mr.
▶ 1:21:18Sen. Klobuchar: Romano, how would you respond to the president and his allies that claim the work of law enforcement and your fellow prosecutors was a "diabolical weaponization of federal law enforcement?"
▶ 1:21:30Mr. Romano: I think it is slanderous.
▶ 1:21:34Sen. Klobuchar: Ok.
▶ 1:21:35Mr. Romano: I think it is offensive, frankly. We worked hard. We were committed public servant who worked to protect the lives of police officers who were harmed. We worked to protect numbers of congress, their staff whose lives were threatened. We did so in an we did so in a nonpartisan manner the same way we investigate federal cases throughout the country.
▶ 1:21:57Sen. Klobuchar: Thank you. Mr. schwager, I was there january 6. In fact, it was senator blunt and myself and vice president pence who were the last ones coming out of the senate to go to the house to get the election certified at 4:00 in the morning. Special counsel smith was appointed to investigate the president's role in the assault and determined if he broke the law.
▶ 1:22:21Sen. Klobuchar: Remind the subcommittee the purpose of special counsel smith's investigation and the context in which he sought the phone told records of those contacted by the president and his allies that day.
▶ 1:22:34Mr. Schwager: It is my understanding that special counsel smith was investigating serious allegations of the events on january 6 and allegations of fraud that were surrounding and connected to january 6.
▶ 1:22:49Sen. Klobuchar: Ok, thank you. So the record is crystal clear, did any of your companies receive a request from jack smith for his team for information that would have revealed the content of any phone call or text message? >> no, senator. >> we did not. >> no, senator.
▶ 1:23:08Sen. Klobuchar: Ok. And it is not possible for the special counsel's office to retroactively tap office lines. Is that correct? >> that is correct.
▶ 1:23:19Sen. Klobuchar: Ok. All right. Thank you. Last, the white house website also faults capitol police for the violence that took place on january 6, blaming them for turning a peaceful demonstration into chaos. Those are the words of the website. For Mr. schwager, you were on the senate floor. Can you describe what the capitol police did that day?
▶ 1:23:44Mr. Schwager: The capitol police made me feel safe. They followed all the procedures we had always drilled on. They stood with all of you, and I was fortunate to be among all of you so that I received their protection as well. They were heroic.
▶ 1:24:09Mr. Schwager: We saw them with bloodied faces still coming and speaking to you to serve you and to protect you. And I am extremely grateful for their service that day.
▶ 1:24:20Sen. Klobuchar: Thank you. Mr. romano, as you know, special counsel smith testified before the house judiciary committee last month. During that testimony come up president trump posted on social media that "hopefully the attorney general is looking at what he has done, including some of the crooked and quick witnesses he was attending to use in his case against me." in your more than 15 years as a prosecutor at the justice department under presidents of both parties, democratic and
▶ 1:24:50Sen. Klobuchar: Republican, have you ever seen a president expressed a desire for the attorney general to investigate a prosecutor for doing their job?
▶ 1:24:59Mr. Romano: I have never seen that.
▶ 1:25:00Sen. Klobuchar: Do you believe it is appropriate for a sitting president to encourage the attorney general to investigate a former prosecutor for doing his job?
▶ 1:25:08Mr. Romano: Absolutely not.
▶ 1:25:09Sen. Klobuchar: Thank you. Thank you.
▶ 1:25:15Chair Blackburn: Without objection, I would like to introduce into the record the letters chairman grassley and this committee have sent to the telecoms and the responses that have been received. So ordered. Senator cornyn, you are recognized.
▶ 1:25:33Sen. Cornyn: Mr. miller, you indicated that you could have appealed the nondisclosure order. Was that correct?
▶ 1:25:42Mr. Miller: Senator, we could have challenged the nondisclosure order in court.
▶ 1:25:49Sen. Cornyn: You were told not to do so -- you chose not to do so? You chose not to do so?
▶ 1:25:55Mr. Miller: Correct, senator. We did not have a process at that time.
▶ 1:25:59Sen. Cornyn: And of course, the member of congress who was the target, because they did not know the subpoena had been issued or that you had responded and supplied the roll records, they had -- toll records, they had no way of challenging.
▶ 1:26:17Mr. Miller: You are absolutely right, senator, a member of congress could not have challenged a subpoena they did not know about. That is why we have focused our process going forward ongoing to the greatest extent we can for members.
▶ 1:26:29Sen. Cornyn: Mr. mcatee, can you explain why for example the toll records of speaker mccarthy and senator cruz were treated differently?
▶ 1:26:41Mr. Mcatee: Certainly. Senator graham demonstrably captured it well. There are categories at issue here. Senator graham pointed out two of them. One category is descendant sergeant at arms of the capitol, and you saw that invoice. None of the subpoenas we received related to that so we will put that to the side. The second category that senator graham spoke to were campaign accounts, and he showed his invoice.
▶ 1:27:09Mr. Mcatee: As I testified earlier, when we received a request for such a campaign account for two sitting memos of congress, we did what I told you we did earlier, exercised with reasonable diligence. You are asking appropriate about a third category. Third category being personal numbers, numbers we would have no reason to know belonged to a senator or two a house of representatives member. I will be clear that with respect to Mr.
▶ 1:27:35Mr. Mcatee: Speaker mccarthy's information as well as representative perry's information, those were the third and fourth subpoenas we received respectively from the special counsel's office. In our database of customers, there are over 2000 kevin mccarthy's in our system. In our database, there are over 1500 scott perry's in our system.
▶ 1:28:01Mr. Mcatee: Because it was not covered by 6628, which we talked about, the folks in the subpoena center did their job and did not alert as those could have been numbers of congress. Looking back, I understand why. But now moving forward, we will be creating that database I talked about in my written testimony in which any member of congress will be able to identify a phone number belonging to them close, that loophole to make sure we are on top of it moving forward better today than we were yesterday.
▶ 1:28:29Sen. Cornyn: I am looking at and email dated june 22, 2023. It looks like somebody named molly had sent in email -- an email.
▶ 1:28:40Mr. Mcatee: That sounds familiar.
▶ 1:28:42Sen. Cornyn: Raising the issue of state constitutional privilege. And interestingly quotes an 11th circuit and a 1986 case that said the mere fact communication was made with a particular person at a particular time might convey a confidential substantive message within the confines of an applicable privilege.
▶ 1:29:11Sen. Cornyn: So, molly I guess it was raised the issue of whether there was a constitutional privilege applied here. Not to the content, but to the fact of the communication as reflected in the toll record, correct?
▶ 1:29:27Mr. Mcatee: Yes, senator. That was part of our diligence. When we became aware of the subpoenas, in particular as publicly mentioned, the subpoena with senator cruz's campaign account, we begin to research this very issue. You can respect the fact that that emailed represents a whole lot of work behind it. Not just internally at at&t but will consulting with experts as well. It is how we were able to find the case citations as well and we did what was fair game.
▶ 1:29:56Mr. Mcatee: We asked the question that we do not know the answer. I do not know the answer today, but we ask that question.
▶ 1:30:00Sen. Cornyn: Jack smith did not respond to an inquiry as to whether they considered whether the speech and debate clause was implicated, correct?
▶ 1:30:08Mr. Mcatee: That is correct, senator.
▶ 1:30:10Sen. Cornyn: I hope at&t gives molly a promotion or a bonus for doing what every good lawyer is supposed to do, which is to spot issues and then ask questions. Thank you, madam chair.
▶ 1:30:26Chair Blackburn: Senator padilla, you are recognized.
▶ 1:30:31Sen. Padilla: Thank you, madam chair. Colleagues, let's be clear. As much as we have sent it in the country has seen it, there are some people who would like to forget that five years ago, insurrectionists stormed the capitol in an unprecedented attempt to stop the peaceful transfer of power. They were quoted a camping of lies by president trump to overturn the 2020 presidential election.
▶ 1:31:03Sen. Padilla: We all watched the violent attack on the capitol. And president trump and his allies are attempting to whitewash history and say the rioters were nothing but "peaceful protesters." Mr. schwager, you were on the senate floor during the january 6 attack.
▶ 1:31:22Mr. Schwager: Yes, senator.
▶ 1:31:24Sen. Padilla: Can you describe what you witnessed that day? Would you describe what you witnessed that day as actions of "peaceful protesters?"
▶ 1:31:34Mr. Schwager: No, senator.
▶ 1:31:36Sen. Padilla: After the capitol was breached, were you concerned for your safety and the safety of other senate employees?
▶ 1:31:43Ms. Venkatesh: I was, senator -- Mr. schwager, I was, senator.
▶ 1:31:49Sen. Padilla: How would you describe the response by the capitol police?
▶ 1:31:53Mr. Schwager: Aerobic, courageous, overwhelmed. Just extreme he grateful for their sacrifice and their service.
▶ 1:32:02Sen. Padilla: Thankfully, and thankfully the aftermath of the january 6 insurrection, there was still a willingness by the senate as a body on a bipartisan basis to recognize that heroism, that bravery, and to honor, permanently honor among other ways via a plaque that should have been done a long time ago in the U.S. senate. No history is real history.
▶ 1:32:32Sen. Padilla: Truth is truth. Mr. romano, in your prior role, you supervised the prosecution of hundreds of crimes committed during the january 6 attack on the capitol including individuals who violently assaulted law enforcement. Based on that experience, would you describe the mob that descended on the capitol on january 6 as "peaceful?"
▶ 1:32:56Mr. Romano: I would not. There were hundreds of crimes of violence.
▶ 1:33:00Sen. Padilla: And many which were tried. Many where led to convictions.
▶ 1:33:05Mr. Romano: Yes, almost every signal case we presented led to a conviction.
▶ 1:33:09Sen. Padilla: Based on the hundreds of january 6 related prosecutions that you oversaw and the vast amount of evidence that you reviewed, did the january 6 rioters understand that the purpose in attacking the capitol was to prevent the certification of the 2020 election through violence?
▶ 1:33:28Mr. Romano: Yes, many did understand that. Certainly, in fact the overwhelming number understood the purpose was to stop the certification. People discussed that openly through phone records and social media records, which we obtained.
▶ 1:33:42Sen. Padilla: Thank you. It is amazing how more than five years later, despite the evidence, despite the videos, despite not just the prosecutions but the convictions and sadly pardons, we still have to set the record straight -- still have to work hard to set the record straight and make sure history is accurate.
▶ 1:34:06Sen. Padilla: In my time remaining, I want to talk about the sensitivity of data that has been discussed here. Lastly, congress repealed the provision that allowed for potential massive payouts to senators whose phone records are subject to a federal investigation. Those financial rewards should never have become law in the first place.
▶ 1:34:26Sen. Padilla: We need to make sure that senate data in the legislative branch is protected against the trump administration's ongoing weaponization of the executive branch against its political enemies. Question for Mr. miller, Mr. nelson, and Mr. mcatee. Do you agree that senators own their own data and under federal statute and under the contract that you are required to senators of efforts to access their official data? Mr. miller?
▶ 1:34:53Mr. Miller: I do agree that senators have control of their data. Section 6628, senator, and we have implement procedures to implement that.
▶ 1:35:09Mr. Nelson: The same for t-mobile.
▶ 1:35:11Mr. Mcatee: You are our customer and we protect your data. The senate accounts to senate sergeant at arms, but rest assured we protect your data as a customer.
▶ 1:35:23Sen. Padilla: There has been commitment on behalf of at&t and verizon to continue the work in strengthening contracts with the sergeant at arms, but I want to make sure I afford t-mobile the same opportunity for abundant clarity of that commitment. >> yes, we are following the same approaches as well.
▶ 1:35:45Sen. Padilla: The same contract language, same protocols? >> yes. We are working on senate official lines for sure and working on a process for personal lines, campaign lines, so that those people can be provided notice where the law allows.
▶ 1:36:03Sen. Padilla: Thank you very much. Thank you madam chair.
▶ 1:36:06Chair Blackburn: Senator hawley.
▶ 1:36:08Sen. Hawley: Thank you. Mr. mcatee, let me start with you and drill down on what happened here. When you got a subpoena from jack smith for senator cruz's records, you pushed back on this. How did you do that? How did you know it was senator cruz whose records were being requested?
▶ 1:36:28Mr. Mcatee: In that case, senator, it was fairly obvious. The subscriber name was ted cruz for senate, so we put it together.
▶ 1:36:36Sen. Hawley: Yeah. Huh. You thought to actually look at the number and match it up and maybe see if there would be a legal problem here. You asked a few questions. Is that fair to say?
▶ 1:36:46Mr. Mcatee: That is correct.
▶ 1:36:47Sen. Hawley: What happened next?
▶ 1:36:49Mr. Mcatee: What happened next is we did research as you expect the legal department to do. We talked with consultant with outside experts and talk among ourselves -- we consulted with outside experts and talked among ourselves. We asked a question and sent a nemo from my department asking special counsel's views on the potential constitutional applications under article one.
▶ 1:37:16Sen. Hawley: Did this subpoena include a nondisclosure order?
▶ 1:37:20Mr. Mcatee: It did.
▶ 1:37:21Sen. Hawley: But that did not stop you from conducting a basic inquiry?
▶ 1:37:24Mr. Mcatee: It did not.
▶ 1:37:25Sen. Hawley: I am glad you did because it turns out it was illegal as we have covered exhaustively in this hearing and others. It was required notification to members of sitting congress if their information is subpoenaed in any way, not to much of the contractor sergeant at arms had. My question to you, why did you not do any of this?
▶ 1:37:52Mr. Miller: At that time, we should have had a better process. But at that time, we did not train our subpoena analysts to do a searching inquiry into the subscriber associated.
▶ 1:38:04Sen. Hawley: What does that mean? What does that mean? You did not bother to try to associate the phone number with any name?
▶ 1:38:10Mr. Miller: Senator, we respect the privacy of our customers, and we did not want --
▶ 1:38:15Sen. Hawley: Apparently not because you turn over every piece of information. You turned it over with no process at all, so let's skip that part. Just get to the part where you tell me what you did not do anything that Mr. mcatee did.
▶ 1:38:29Mr. Miller: Senator, the process we have in place now would --
▶ 1:38:33Sen. Hawley: I am not interested in that. I am interested in why you did not do any of the basic investigation, ask a question. You get a subpoena for all of these numbers, in your testimony is you just handed over the documents, you did not do anything? Is that what happened?
▶ 1:38:48Mr. Miller: Three reasons, senator. First, when we receive a subpoena, we do not know the nature of the investigation or the sensitivities involved. Second, as I mentioned, we train our subpoena analysts to respect the confidentiality and privacy.
▶ 1:39:05Sen. Hawley: So you don't look and match up the numbers. You don't try to associate a number with a name.
▶ 1:39:10Mr. Miller: No, senator. We do now from emerson congress, but that was not the procedure at the time.
▶ 1:39:16Sen. Hawley: Really because you testified to senator durbin not long ago that you disclosed all the names to this committee of all the people who were associated with the numbers, including mine. So clearly you have the ability to do it but just did not do it. Is that correct?
▶ 1:39:29Mr. Miller: We had the ability to do it, yes.
▶ 1:39:32Sen. Hawley: But you did not do it.
▶ 1:39:33Mr. Miller: We thought we had good reasons for it.
▶ 1:39:35Sen. Hawley: What is that? You have no problem associating names with accounts when you go to bill people, which you do every month. I seem to recall getting a bill from you monthly. You had no problem associating my name with my number when you wanted money from me. But when it came to protecting the basic rights of your consumers, your subscribers, your customers, you could not be bothered?
▶ 1:39:56Mr. Miller: No, senator, I would not say that.
▶ 1:39:59Sen. Hawley: I would. I think I just did.
▶ 1:40:03Mr. Miller: Senator.
▶ 1:40:05Sen. Hawley: Why didn't you follow the contract that you have with the united states government? You got a contract worth millions of dollars with the united states government which obligates you to inform you sergeant at arms if you get any requests for process or information from a senator or any number associated with that contract. That contract was in place and that language was in place when these subpoena requests came through. And you did not do any of it. Why is that?
▶ 1:40:31Mr. Miller: Senator, I don't agree.
▶ 1:40:33Sen. Hawley: You don't agree with what?
▶ 1:40:35Mr. Miller: That we violated the contract.
▶ 1:40:37Sen. Hawley: Really? The contract says you are obliged to buy the senate. I am quoting a letter not from senator graham or a republican but from senator ron wyden, who sent a letter to every member of the united states senate may 21, 2025, notifying us these contract terms were being regularly violated by your company among others. So why didn't you follow the contract that you were making millions of dollars on? Why didn't you do that?
▶ 1:41:02Mr. Miller: Senator, I get your frustration with this issue.
▶ 1:41:06Sen. Hawley: I just want the truth. I am frustrated because we get the runaround constantly. We have gotten it all day from you. So why did you follow the contract?
▶ 1:41:16Mr. Miller: Senator, the contract covers the definition of senate data. At this time, we did not interpret the contract to apply.
▶ 1:41:27Sen. Hawley: To phone lines?
▶ 1:41:29Mr. Miller: To what verizon generates.
▶ 1:41:31Sen. Hawley: For heaven's sake, this is absurd. We are talking about members of congress. If you are a normal person, if you are a working person out there, just think of the fact that these guys with one exception, Mr. mcatee's company, at&t, all of the other guys just handed over this data. They could not do it fast enough. They rushed to do it. When they want to bill you, they can find you in a heartbeat. When it comes to protect your data, they are nowhere to be found.
▶ 1:41:58Sen. Hawley: It is absolutely a disgrace, and the fact that you testified earlier that you get hundreds of thousands of requests for personal information every year is chilling because what all of your customers should know is you just turn it over willy-nilly. I would expect better from you, from all of you frankly. I think what you have done here is outrageous and the implications for the privacy of the american people are absolutely unbelievable. Thank you, Mr. mcatee, for protecting your customers. I wish these other guys would do the same.
▶ 1:42:26Sen. Hawley: I tell you what, everybody ought to go to at&t because verizon and whoever you are, t-mobile, you guys are terrible. Thank you, madam chair.
▶ 1:42:33Chair Blackburn: Thank you, senator hawley. I want to follow up with one question to each of the telecoms because jack smith in his hearing at the house said he could not recall how many members of congress had had their privacy violated.
▶ 1:42:50Chair Blackburn: So to each of the telecoms here this morning, I want to go down the line and ask you, are there additional members of congress that you received requests for their information? Mr. miller?
▶ 1:43:06Mr. Miller: Senator, we believe that either from the former special counsel's office or a predecessor law enforcement entity, we received subpoenas for a total of 15 members of congress.
▶ 1:43:19Chair Blackburn: And that is it? Mr. nelson?
▶ 1:43:22Mr. Nelson: One member of congress.
▶ 1:43:24Chair Blackburn: Mr. mcatee?
▶ 1:43:27Mr. Mcatee: No additional. The ones we discussed, four total.
▶ 1:43:31Chair Blackburn: Thank you. Senator whitehouse, you are recognized.
▶ 1:43:36Sen. Whitehouse: Thank you. Let me start by rejecting the notion that the department of justice's investigation into the attack on the capitol was worse than the attack on the capitol. There is a real then and now problem here. Then chair blackburn said the attack on the capitol was "truly despicable and unacceptable." senator cruz called it a violent terrorist attack on the capitol.
▶ 1:44:04Senator Cornyn: For those who planned and dissipated in the violence to be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law. Senator hawley said those who attacked police and broke the law must be prosecuted. I agree with Mr. romano that this was a righteous prosecution. But trump serbians now requires amnesia.
▶ 1:44:27Senator Cornyn: I would like to put into the record madame charity december 2024 ig report if it has not already been put into the record , so this ig report reflects that the trump department of justice in 2018 subpoenaed members of congress,, also subpoenaed members of our congressional staff, and that
▶ 1:45:00Senator Cornyn: The trump department of the trump department of justice also obtained non-disclosure orders for those democrats in office whose toll records they had subpoenaed, and for congressional staff as well. The nondisclosure orders were renewed in 2019 and were renewed again in 2020.
▶ 1:45:26Senator Cornyn: So, through the trump first-term, trump department of justice was seeking and obtaining toll records from members of congress of the other party. Mr.
▶ 1:45:40Senator Cornyn: Romano, is there any difference in the procedure that the department of justice would have followed in the trump administration seeking and securing the records of members of congress when that was done by the special counsel?
▶ 1:45:57Mr. Romano: Not that I am aware of, senator.
▶ 1:46:00Sen. Whitehouse: Subpoena, then seek a court order, and using just the numbers of the folks involved.
▶ 1:46:08Mr. Romano: That would be my assumption, yes.
▶ 1:46:11Sen. Whitehouse: I think the ig report bears that out. I would also add that at various times what took place here, the toll records search has been described wrongly as a wiretap, wrongly as providing text information, and wrongly as providing geolocation data. Mr. romano, Mr. schwager, are any of those things available from a toll records request?
▶ 1:46:39Mr. Romano: No, they are not.
▶ 1:46:41Mr. Schwager: No, senator.
▶ 1:46:45Sen. Whitehouse: And last, this question of the offense that some of my colleagues take by inferring an accusation that they would have been involved in the destruction of evidence, the intimidation of witnesses, or the tampering with the investigation. Does it make any sense to you, Mr. romano?
▶ 1:47:09Sen. Whitehouse: Is it customarily the subject of a toll records request who is the concern about tampering or intonation or distraction, or is it a subject of the investigation?
▶ 1:47:18Mr. Romano: The concern is typically the target of the investigation which here would have been president trump. The concern would be that he would try to intimidate or corral people into deleting records or providing favorable testimony, which I think is borne out by his public actions leading up to the election.
▶ 1:47:35Sen. Whitehouse: And as jack smith pointed out under oath in the house of representatives in his testimony there, there was in fact an abundant record to give the prosecutors concern that trump and his co-conspirators, his confederates would do exactly that. Did you see prosecutor smith's testimony?
▶ 1:47:56Mr. Romano: I did not see it. I read about it after the fact.
▶ 1:47:59Sen. Whitehouse: Do you agree?
▶ 1:48:01Mr. Romano: I think the riot itself provides concerned that supporters of the president went to the capitol to intimidate members of congress.
▶ 1:48:11Sen. Whitehouse: These members were selected because the president and members of his conspiracy had called those numbers.
▶ 1:48:17Mr. Romano: Right.
▶ 1:48:18Sen. Whitehouse: Thank you.
▶ 1:48:20Chair Blackburn: Senator kennedy, you are recognized.
▶ 1:48:24Sen. Kennedy: Mr. miller, you are the general counsel of verizon. Is that right?
▶ 1:48:31Mr. Miller: I've our consumer group, senator.
▶ 1:48:34Sen. Kennedy: Who is your ceo?
▶ 1:48:36Mr. Miller: Dan shulman.
▶ 1:48:38Sen. Kennedy: Could you get close to the mic please?
▶ 1:48:42Mr. Miller: Dance roman.
▶ 1:48:43Sen. Kennedy: Why isn't he here today?
▶ 1:48:46Mr. Miller: Senator, I understand you wanted a legal department representative.
▶ 1:48:50Sen. Kennedy: No, we invited him. Why didn't he come?
▶ 1:48:53Mr. Miller: Senator, my understudy was you were looking for legal department testimony.
▶ 1:48:58Sen. Kennedy: Does he know you are here?
▶ 1:49:00Mr. Miller: Yes, senator.
▶ 1:49:02Sen. Kennedy: Is he too tired, I mean too busy to come?
▶ 1:49:06Mr. Miller: Absolutely not. Mr. shulman is focused on finding the right solutions.
▶ 1:49:11Sen. Kennedy: I can tell. Does he not respect the united states senate?
▶ 1:49:15Mr. Miller: He absolutely respect to the united states senate.
▶ 1:49:19Sen. Kennedy: Maybe he is tired. Could he be tired? I looked up his salary last year. He made 71 million dollars. Maybe he has been up all night coming his money and is tired. That be it?
▶ 1:49:32Mr. Miller: No, senator. Mr. shulman has only easily been appointed ceo.
▶ 1:49:37Sen. Kennedy: Were you general counsel when verizon had to pay $93.5 million because it cheated the taxpayers of this country by overcharging on invoices to the gsa?
▶ 1:49:52Mr. Miller: Senator, can you say it little bit more?
▶ 1:49:56Sen. Kennedy: Eudora member that -- you don't member that?
▶ 1:50:00Mr. Miller: I am not familiar.
▶ 1:50:02Sen. Kennedy: Were you ceo when the sec fined verizon $46.9 million because you shared location data of customers with third parties?
▶ 1:50:15Mr. Miller: I am not now and have never been the ceo of verizon.
▶ 1:50:19Sen. Kennedy: Were you general counsel?
▶ 1:50:21Mr. Miller: I was not in my current role, but I am familiar with the matter you are talking about.
▶ 1:50:26Sen. Kennedy: Were you general counsel of verizon when verizon had to pay $30 million in litigation for cheating their own employees?
▶ 1:50:36Mr. Miller: Senator, I have some familiarity with that matter. That was not in my preview.
▶ 1:50:41Sen. Kennedy: Were you general counsel of verizon when you guys implement racial quotas in hiring?
▶ 1:50:49Mr. Miller: Senator, I am not quite sure what you are talking about. I do disagree with the suggestion.
▶ 1:50:56Sen. Kennedy: Yes, you do. You know perfectly well what I am talking about, counsel. Were you general counsel of verizon when verizon implemented quotas in hiring based on gender?
▶ 1:51:06Mr. Miller: Senator, I am not aware of verizon ever implement quotas.
▶ 1:51:11Sen. Kennedy: Sir you are. That is illegal. It is illegal.
▶ 1:51:15Mr. Miller: I understand it is illegal and I am not aware of verizon ever having done that.
▶ 1:51:20Sen. Kennedy: Did you take common-law?
▶ 1:51:24Mr. Miller: I did.
▶ 1:51:27Sen. Kennedy: Were you in the quad playing frisbee hearing that you cannot just terminate people based on the this is a race or -- people based on the basis of race or gender?
▶ 1:51:37Mr. Miller: I am aware.
▶ 1:51:39Sen. Kennedy: Were you general counsel when he required employees to teach them about critical race theory including "systemic racism, white fragility, and intersectionality?"
▶ 1:51:50Mr. Miller: Senator, that has never happened.
▶ 1:51:53Sen. Kennedy: Yes, it did. You are under oath, counsel. So you got this subpoena from jack smith for senators's records. Did you know who jack smith was?
▶ 1:52:07Mr. Miller: I am aware of who jack smith is.
▶ 1:52:09Sen. Kennedy: You knew at the time that jack smith worked for president biden and the attorney general, president biden's appointee hired jack smith to prosecute a former president of the united states, a former opponent to president biden, and a current opponent of president biden, and everybody associated with him. You were aware of that?
▶ 1:52:34Mr. Miller: Senator, I am aware of the nature of Mr. smith's investigation.
▶ 1:52:38Sen. Kennedy: Yeah, I thought you would be. And you get this order along with the names that the federal government would want you to divulge that says the people on this list we think might destroy evidence or tamper with witnesses. And it was signed by judge boasberg. Is that right?
▶ 1:53:01Mr. Miller: We did receive a nondisclosure.
▶ 1:53:03Sen. Kennedy: Do you know who judge boasberg was?
▶ 1:53:06Mr. Miller: Senator, I was not involved in reviewing that nondisclosure order.
▶ 1:53:11Sen. Kennedy: You were general counsel? This was just a frivolous thing to you? Were you aware that judge boasberg hates republicans like the devil hates holy water?
▶ 1:53:21Mr. Miller: Senator, I do not know judge boasberg. I am at aware of who he hates.
▶ 1:53:26Sen. Kennedy: Boasberg. Ok. Did you look up the names of the people being subpoenaed, whose records were subpoenaed?
▶ 1:53:33Mr. Miller: In responding to the subpoena, senator, we produced the subscriber names.
▶ 1:53:38Sen. Kennedy: Did you look up the names to see who they were?
▶ 1:53:41Mr. Miller: Personally, no.
▶ 1:53:42Sen. Kennedy: Just give me one more minute, madam chair. So let me get this straight. You get a subpoena from jack smith, who has been on the front page of every paper, with an order signed by judge boasberg saying these guys might destroy records. And you did not look up the names. Is that your testimony?
▶ 1:54:06Mr. Miller: Senator, when our analysts responded to the subpoena --
▶ 1:54:10Sen. Kennedy: Is that your testimony? Don't stall me.
▶ 1:54:15Mr. Miller: I am try to answer your question.
▶ 1:54:16Sen. Kennedy: No, you are not. You are trying to stall me. You know I am out of time.
▶ 1:54:21Mr. Miller: Part of the response to the subpoena would have been the subscriber names associated with the accounts.
▶ 1:54:26Sen. Kennedy: Give me one more minute madam chair, please.
▶ 1:54:29Chair Blackburn: Without objection.
▶ 1:54:33Sen. Kennedy: Did your board of directors know you guys were doing all of this? On your board of directors, you got representatives from starbucks, coca-cola, ups, longhorn steakhouse, olive garden. Did they know you guys were doing all of this?
▶ 1:54:55Mr. Miller: Senator, can you help me understand what you mean by "all of this?"
▶ 1:55:01Sen. Kennedy: You broke the law.
▶ 1:55:02Mr. Miller: No, senator.
▶ 1:55:04Sen. Kennedy: Negligence. Called malpractice. You just turned over the records. Did you appeal the order?
▶ 1:55:11Mr. Miller: No, senator.
▶ 1:55:13Sen. Kennedy: Did you call the senators?
▶ 1:55:15Mr. Miller: No, senator.
▶ 1:55:17Sen. Kennedy: Did you file a motion to quash?
▶ 1:55:20Mr. Miller: No, senator.
▶ 1:55:21Sen. Kennedy: You just accepted. You just took the information that jack smith and judge boasberg gave you and sucked it up like a hoover deluxe. Didn't you?
▶ 1:55:31Mr. Miller: Senator, we follow the law.
▶ 1:55:34Sen. Kennedy: No, you didn't. Counselor, you are to hide your head in a bag, and this is not over. And all the rest of you should too.
▶ 1:55:44Chair Blackburn: Senator schiff, and then we will follow at senator lee. There is a vote on the board. Senator lee, you will serve as the chair when I vote.
▶ 1:55:55Sen. Schiff: Thank you, madam chair. Mr. romano, what are the criteria for the government to seek a nondisclosure order? Under what circumstance is that appropriate?
▶ 1:56:08Mr. Romano: As members have talked about or as senators have talked about, when there is a concern about disclosure of information related to the investigation such as the risk of flight or witness tampering or the destruction of evidence.
▶ 1:56:22Sen. Schiff: And that risk does not have to be the subject of the request for information. That is in this case where you had not a wiretap as some on this committee have alleged but a request for toll records. The concern over witness intimidation or obstruction of evidence does not have to pertain to the subject of that request for toll records, that is the elected officials in this case but could be the target of the investigation. Is that right?
▶ 1:56:51Mr. Romano: Right, the concern would be the target of the investigation would try to intimidate witnesses or take other measures, here president trump.
▶ 1:57:00Sen. Schiff: Are you familiar with the indictment of president trump in both the january 6 investigation as well as the sequestering of classified materials in mar-a-lago?
▶ 1:57:11Mr. Romano: I am.
▶ 1:57:13Sen. Schiff: If we focus on the mar-a-lago case, where their allegations the president was involved in trying to intimidate witnesses or obstruct that investigation?
▶ 1:57:22Mr. Romano: It has been a while since I read that indictment, but it sounds right.
▶ 1:57:26Sen. Schiff: If there was evidence in the government's position that president trump was trying to intimidate witnesses against him, would that be a proper criteria for a nondisclosure order?
▶ 1:57:35Mr. Romano: Absolutely.
▶ 1:57:37Sen. Schiff: If he was trying to obstruct the investigation by destroying evidence my other evidence, that would be among the most powerful reasons for a nondisclosure order, would it not?
▶ 1:57:47Mr. Romano: Yes.
▶ 1:57:48Sen. Schiff: Now, are you familiar with jack smith's deposition before the house of representatives?
▶ 1:57:55Mr. Romano: I have read about it but did not watch it.
▶ 1:57:57Sen. Schiff: In that deposition, jack smith testified in this particular case, there was a grave risk of obstruction of justice given the obstructive conduct of president trump as it was set forth for example in the indictment in florida. President trump tried to obstruct that case in multiple ways, had numerous instances of him attempting to in our view intimidate witnesses or keep them from cooperating.
▶ 1:58:24Sen. Schiff: If that was the case, that would certainly be a basis for a nondisclosure. Wouldn't it?
▶ 1:58:29Mr. Romano: Yes, absolutely.
▶ 1:58:31Sen. Schiff: Now, I am sure there is ample evidence within volume two of jack smith's report, that is the volume that deals with the obstruction of justice and retention of classified documents case in florida, ample evidence of what the prosecutors were particularly concerned about in terms of trump's willingness to obstruct justice, intimidate, destroy evidence.
▶ 1:59:00Sen. Schiff: So if this committee were genuinely interested in finding out whether there was a legitimate basis for the government to seek an ndo, wouldn't it make sense for this committee to subpoena volume two of the report?
▶ 1:59:11Mr. Romano: I think so.
▶ 1:59:17Sen. Schiff: Now, I don't know if you have been tracking the litigation in florida, but the appellate court in that case ordered judge cannon to make a determination before now as to whether it was justified to continue withholding that report. And she has still not released that report. Is that your understanding as well?
▶ 1:59:35Mr. Romano: I have not been closely following that, but that sounds correct.
▶ 1:59:39Sen. Schiff: I don't know why apart from being a judge that has made a lot of suspect rulings in favor of the president that have been criticized by legal scholars I think across the board, I don't know why judge cannon continues to withhold this report. But this committee has the power to subpoena that report.
▶ 2:00:03Sen. Schiff: This committee has the power to bring jack smith in here in a public hearing to ask him these questions instead of badgering all of you. We can go right to the source. We could question the prosecutor who led that investigation about, what was it about the president's conduct that made him concerned if they did not get a nondisclosure order that he may try to intimidate witnesses? Ed buck, it is not like any intimidation by this president is a mystery to people. We have seen this.
▶ 2:00:36Sen. Schiff: Let's do something about it. Let's subpoena that report. Let's make sure the public sees it. Let's make sure that we see it. Instead of berating all of you, let's examine the basis for that concern about witness tampering. Let's bring that back to before the american people. And with that, Mr. chairman, I yield back.
▶ 2:01:00Sen. Lee: Thank you. I want to thank senator blackburn for putting together this hearing along with chairman grassley. This hearing is covering an important topic. L'affaire. The l'affaire that specifically occurred under the biden administration at unprecedented levels.
▶ 2:01:25Sen. Lee: I think every senator in this report to be able to recognize that sickly being in contact with the president of the united states does not mean that one should be targeted by the U.S. to permit of justice. I think everyone in this room should be able to recognize the consequences of this sort of action. This is the kind of offense that occurs in little bit like a hit and run but worse. With a hit and run, you don't know who hit you. Amen over you and then left, but at least with a hit and run, you might have somebody, some witness.
▶ 2:01:55Sen. Lee: Haps the victim, perhaps someone else who might be able to describe the car. Here the victim does not even know what or whether they have been hit, but they have been injured nonetheless in one way or another. And the nondisclosure order made darn clear of that. This is the sort of thing that occurred under president biden's direction.
▶ 2:02:15Sen. Lee: Not only were republican senators targeted in what appears to be the political weaponization of the department of justice under special counsel jack smith, but as we learned during the hearing held previously by senator cruz, judge bowes judge bo boasberg went further by granting these nondisclosure orders that prevented the targeted senators myself included from even learning about these for years. In fact, it has only been in recent days that I discovered that I was among them.
▶ 2:02:45Sen. Lee: It was only through chairman grassley's oversight, has dogged determination to look into this that these actions came to light. Otherwise, we may never have known. Now, look, this should not be a partisan issue. Because these doors once they start swinging, they swing both ways. The department of justice must never be weaponized against members of the opposing party. It should not happen.
▶ 2:03:12Sen. Lee: And here it was triggered by the fact that they had communicated with the president of the united states, something that all of us do on some regular occasions, and many regular occasions. Now, companies that fail to challenge or more carefully scrutinize these actions do bear some responsibility.
▶ 2:03:39Sen. Lee: Look come over the years I have been customers of all three companies present here today, at&t, verizon, and more recently t-mobile. This is a big issue. It is a serious issue where fundamental rights are at stake. And that is why I think we need to focus our efforts on the fact that things like this happen. Remember what happened with the church committee back in the 1970's. Went through and reviewed how these kinds of abuses have taken place over the years.
▶ 2:04:08Sen. Lee: What are the findings -- one of the findings that they reached was in every presidential administration since woodrow wilson up until the time of the church hearings in the 1970's, in every one of those in ministrations, some portion or portions of our intelligence gathering and law enforcement apparatus had been weaponized for political espionage against the president's perceived political enemies. Every single one of them.
▶ 2:04:34Sen. Lee: That is why this unleashed a raft of reforms, many of which remain in place to this day, but some of which apparently need updating to reflect changes in technology and technique. Perhaps we have gotten rusty.
▶ 2:04:52Sen. Lee: One of those pieces of legislation that I think we need to focus on involves something with bipartisan support, something that senator coons and I reintroduced recently called the nondisclosure fairness act. It would mandate meaningful judicial review to ensure that nondisclosure orders meet certain constitutional standards and require reports to issue written findings justifying the lawfulness of those orders.
▶ 2:05:22Sen. Lee: Now, this bill would apply not just to senators, not just to members of congress, but it would protect the rights of all americans who might be subject to such nondisclosure reports. Senators blackburn and cruz have joined as cosponsors and I hope all senators will regardless of which party they belong to. It should be important to everyone. We should also be concerned about other areas where these abuses might be taking place.
▶ 2:05:48Sen. Lee: There are too many to name here, but one of them that is particularly relevant in the coming weeks involves section 702 of the foreign intelligence surveillance act. As the name implies, this is supposed to be about getting communications of foreign adversaries, not american citizens. But as with what we are covering here, these requests from telecommunications companies backed by a nondisclosure order, so too would advise 702.
▶ 2:06:21Sen. Lee: Someone could metaphorically be speaking be run over without ever knowing what happened, without ever knowing they were victimized. Perhaps ever, perhaps months or years after the fact after the damage has been done, after their privacy has been invaded, after their constitutional rights have been trampled. That is why congress has no business reauthorizing 702.
▶ 2:06:45Sen. Lee: As it is being called upon to do in the coming months without a warrant requirement applicable to inquiries involving U.S. citizens and other U.S. persons. The fourth amendment matters. And political warfare lawfare is bad. Should not weaponize these things and should put in place protections.
▶ 2:07:10Sen. Lee: Protections fought for for many centuries by this country ended a tradition that goes back centuries before we were even a country in england. These things matter. We have to make sure they are rendered not dead letter, and we are heading dangerously in that direction now. What we are discussing at this hearing I fear is only the tip of the iceberg. We must fix it. Thank you. Senator moody, you are next.
▶ 2:07:38Sen. Moody: Thank you so much. And I appreciate everyone's attention to this. Those that are here with us today for the subcommittee hearing and the witnesses that are here to testify. Appreciate the subcommittee chairwoman calling this important hearing. And I was sad and shocked at some of the testimony that we have already heard today.
▶ 2:08:06Sen. Moody: Certainly as a former federal prosecutor myself, I was very concerned with some of the statements that I heard from Mr. romano. Every federal prosecutor who was given that enormous responsibility also should inherit with that an understanding of what power that is.
▶ 2:08:30Sen. Moody: And I was horrified to hear as a former federal prosecutor to hear some of these statements from Mr. romano and the flippant way he referred to some of the investigatory techniques. I felt like your testimony underpinned everything we the people feared about giving the government too much power.
▶ 2:08:54Sen. Moody: And why it is important that those that are members hired into our government understand that this is a government and we have a real need to respect the limitations of power. In fact, our constitution and laws put in place ways to do that so we ensure that we the people maintain control and account ability of our own government.
▶ 2:09:22Sen. Moody: You said you were surprised because as a former prosecutor, you thought there was nothing remotely scandalous or controversial about the collection of toll records from united states senators. You said that the subpoenas were routine and criminal investigations and that you understand some of the senators are unhappy about that. Let me quote this exactly.
▶ 2:09:53Sen. Moody: You know that the senators's toll records were collected and are unhappy about that, but that is understandable. In your words, nobody enjoys having the government collect their information. But apart from that unhappiness, you were not harmed. I am sure putin says the same thing. A statement like that shocked me to my core.
▶ 2:10:15Sen. Moody: The disregard that you showed for what many believe was an unlawful or a disregard for the protection of privacy is unconscionable. Our country is 250 years old. I think it is meaningful we are having a hearing right now about this to tether us back to what our founding fathers feared.
▶ 2:10:44Sen. Moody: James madison warned us in federalist 51 if men were angels, no government necessary. If angels were to govern men, there would be no need for internal, external controls on government. Goldwater, one of the conservative movement's founders, warned that absolute power corrupts. I believe that we are here 250 years after our founding to make sure that jack smith 2.0 never happens again, cannot happen again.
▶ 2:11:13Sen. Moody: Maybe it is this hearing is exactly what we need to we knew our vigor to fiercely protecting against an all-powerful government.
▶ 2:11:29Sen. Moody: Because quite frankly what we saw hunter biden and that administration -- under buy-in and that administration were not that many individuals concerned with controls that were meant to restrain an unfettered laser focused mission to get trump and anyone allied with him. That is why we are here. Mr. miller, I thank you for being here today. I know you faced some intense questioning about your company's response to subpoenas.
▶ 2:11:59Sen. Moody: Appreciate your candor and the work that you are doing to protect against this in the future. Verizon is 26 years old. Yes?
▶ 2:12:07Mr. Miller: That is right, senator.
▶ 2:12:09Sen. Moody: And you believe the company was caught flat-footed here, that there were not mechanisms in place where you could have seen this coming.
▶ 2:12:17Mr. Miller: I believe we obeyed the law, but we could have had a better process in place.
▶ 2:12:22Sen. Moody: Kind of like at&t did. Although I am wondering why senator cruz stopped there but others were released. At&t was able to catch that. Correct?
▶ 2:12:33Mr. Miller: It appears so, senator.
▶ 2:12:35Sen. Moody: The policies you have put in place to protect against this in the future, do you believe they would have prevented this from taking place?
▶ 2:12:42Mr. Miller: I believe they would have allowed for better notice to senators in a more timely fashion.
▶ 2:12:48Sen. Moody: Better notice or notice?
▶ 2:12:50Mr. Miller: I don't know what would have happened if we could go back in time, senator, but I do believe it would have been a better position for both verizon and the senate.
▶ 2:13:00Sen. Moody: Are there any recommended legal changes by your company that you believe congress could adopt to make sure this does not happen again?
▶ 2:13:09Mr. Miller: Senator, what we have been focused on is clarity of expectations. We are as a provider happy to follow whatever the rules are. We just want to know what the expectations are and so that we have the right mindset and that you have the right expectation about what we will and will not do.
▶ 2:13:29Sen. Moody: You are back. Thank you. Thank you.
▶ 2:13:32Chair Blackburn: Thank you, senator moody. We've got one more member that is on their way. I got a couple of questions. Mr. romano, in one of your responses, you tagged -- you made a comment, president and his co-conspirators. Were you referring to those of us that had our phone records seized as being co-conspirators?
▶ 2:14:01Mr. Romano: No, absolutely not. I was relating to the several unnamed co-conspirators. No, of course not.
▶ 2:14:11Chair Blackburn: Do you want to provide a written clarification for that remark?
▶ 2:14:14Mr. Romano: If the committee requests one, I certainly would be happy to.
▶ 2:14:18Chair Blackburn: It is requested.
▶ 2:14:20Mr. Romano: Ok.
▶ 2:14:23Chair Blackburn: I have a question for each of the telecoms. So, for verizon, at&t, and t-mobile, have you all fired anyone involved in this debacle? Mr. miller first.
▶ 2:14:36Mr. Miller: Senator, no one has been fired. We do have new leadership over the organization.
▶ 2:14:42Chair Blackburn: Nobody lost their job?
▶ 2:14:47Mr. Miller: New leadership, no one has been terminated, senator.
▶ 2:14:48Chair Blackburn: Mr. nelson?
▶ 2:14:49Mr. Nelson: Nobody has been terminated.
▶ 2:14:52Chair Blackburn: Ok.
▶ 2:14:53Mr. Mcatee: No one has been terminated at at&t.
▶ 2:14:55Chair Blackburn: All right. We are looking at the stored communications act. And we are working on some modifications and updates to that and doing some ndo reform legislation. Particularly the ndo fairness act. That is something that some of us on this day as -- on this dais are cosponsors of.
▶ 2:15:29Chair Blackburn: So we will ask each of you, would you support reforms to the stored communications act to mandate meaningful judicial review to ensure that the n do's meet the constitutional standards? So, Mr. miller, for you first.
▶ 2:15:46Mr. Miller: Yes, senator. We would be happy to work with you and your office on that.
▶ 2:15:51Chair Blackburn: Ok.
▶ 2:15:52Mr. Nelson: Same for us. We would support clarity on ndo requirements and happy to work with your office.
▶ 2:15:58Chair Blackburn: Ok.
▶ 2:15:59Mr. Mcatee: Agreed, we would support that kind of clarity.
▶ 2:16:03Chair Blackburn: All right. Would you support that before issuing an ndo there would be a requirement of the court that they should have a written determination that the statutory standard for issuing the ndo has been met and has been based on specific facts?
▶ 2:16:23Mr. Miller: Senator, that sounds like a reasonable expectation of the court. Happy to discuss it.
▶ 2:16:29Chair Blackburn: Ok.
▶ 2:16:30Mr. Nelson: Same here.
▶ 2:16:31Chair Blackburn: All right.
▶ 2:16:32Mr. Mcatee: Senator, I know our team is looking at that and will come back with a position once we analyze it.
▶ 2:16:39Chair Blackburn: Ok. I have one more question for Mr. miller, and then we have one member. Do we know how close? On his way. Ok. Because I don't want to close the hearing until he gets here. All right. Jack smith's deposition before the house judiciary committee, they talked about 6628.
▶ 2:17:10Chair Blackburn: And we have discussed that some this morning. Specific question to him was comeau whose responsibility that him was, whose responsibility was it to flag that an ndo was placed on a senator's phone line, and here is what jack smith replied.
▶ 2:17:34Chair Blackburn: "my reading of the statute is that it is the job of the carrier, and to me that makes the most sense because they are the ones who have the best and most accurate information about whose phone lines are whose." so, Mr. miller, basically what jack smith did was to throw the telecoms under the bus.
▶ 2:18:03Chair Blackburn: You all have mentioned -- senator graham ask you about this and about who controlled those logs. You all control those logs. So, what is your response to jack smith. ?
▶ 2:18:17Mr. Miller: Senator, I am not sure the full context of what Mr. smith was discussing, but I would think the prosecutors and law-enforcement entity is in the best position to determine whose records are being subpoenaed and whether that individual is a sitting member of congress. Unclear if Mr. smith was implying there is a violation of section 6628, which I would not agree with.
▶ 2:18:45Chair Blackburn: You would not agree that there was a violation of 6628?
▶ 2:18:51Mr. Miller: I would not agree that verizon committed a violation of section 6628.
▶ 2:18:55Chair Blackburn: Ok. Well, I think you have seen there is a difference of opinion on this dais. All right. Are we looking at one minute, two minutes? We don't -- ok.
▶ 2:19:42Chair Blackburn: Let me see if he makes it here. We will get him just a second. He is at the elevator? We will wait another couple of minutes, and we will see if he makes it in.
▶ 2:20:13Chair Blackburn: If not, we will close out.
▶ 2:21:43Chair Blackburn: If he is not -- yeah. If he is not here in seconds, I will have to close. Ok. I guess we will close as we don't have our other member coming. For each of you, the record is going to remain open for seven days. There will be written questions that will come to you. I ask for a timely response.
▶ 2:22:13Chair Blackburn: And those responses for those records. I want to thank each of you for taking the time to be here today for your testimony and for coming before us. With that, the subcommittee on privacy, technology, and the law stands adjourned. [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. Visit ncicap.org]