Untitled Document

[00:00:00] Thank you very much, Madam Chair. Thanks [00:00:01] to the witnesses for being here. Mr. [00:00:03] McGee, let me just start with you. I [00:00:04] just want to try to drill down and get [00:00:06] clear on what happened here. When when [00:00:07] you got a subpoena from Jack Smith for [00:00:11] Senator Cruz's records, you pushed back [00:00:14] on this. How did you do that? I mean, [00:00:16] how did you know it was Senator Cruz who [00:00:17] was whose records are being cored? [00:00:20] >> In that case, Senator, it was fairly [00:00:22] obvious. The subscriber name was Ted [00:00:25] Cruz for Senate. So, we put it together. [00:00:28] >> Yeah. Huh. So, you thought to actually [00:00:31] look at the number and match it up and [00:00:33] maybe see if there might be a legal [00:00:35] problem here. You asked a few questions. [00:00:36] Is that fair to say? [00:00:37] >> That's that's correct. [00:00:38] >> And what happened next? [00:00:39] >> Uh, what happened next was we did some [00:00:41] research uh as you would expect any [00:00:42] legal department to do. As I mentioned [00:00:44] earlier, we uh consulted with outside [00:00:46] experts. We talked among ourselves and [00:00:48] we determined that even though the [00:00:50] subpoena was obligatory that we were [00:00:52] required to respond to it, we can always [00:00:54] ask a question. And so we asked the [00:00:56] question and we sent an email from my [00:00:58] department uh that I read into the [00:01:00] record earlier asking for special [00:01:02] counsel's views on the potential [00:01:04] constitutional implications under [00:01:05] article one. [00:01:06] >> Well, did this subpoena include a [00:01:08] non-disclosure order with it? [00:01:10] >> It did, Senator. [00:01:11] >> But that didn't stop you from conducting [00:01:12] a basic inquiry. [00:01:14] >> No, it did not. [00:01:15] >> Okay. Well, I'm glad you did the inquiry [00:01:17] because as it turns out, the [00:01:18] non-disclosure order was totally [00:01:20] illegal. As we've covered now [00:01:22] exhaustively in this hearing and in [00:01:24] others, statutes in place on the books [00:01:26] in 2020 require required notification to [00:01:30] sitting members of Congress if their [00:01:32] information is subpoenaed in any way. [00:01:35] Not to mention the contract that the [00:01:36] Sergeant-at-Arms has with all three of [00:01:38] the major telecoms. So, I'm glad you did [00:01:39] your job. My question for you is, Mr. [00:01:41] Miller, why didn't you do any of this, [00:01:43] >> Senator? At that time, and I recognize [00:01:46] we should have had a better process [00:01:47] here, but at that time, we did not train [00:01:49] our subpoena analysts to do a searching [00:01:52] inquiry into the subscriber associated [00:01:55] with a particular [00:01:56] >> What does that mean? What does that [00:01:57] mean? You you just didn't bother to try [00:01:59] and associate the phone number with any [00:02:00] name. [00:02:02] >> Senator, we respect the privacy of our [00:02:04] customers and we did not want [00:02:06] >> Apparently not. Because you turned over [00:02:08] every piece of information from every [00:02:09] senator sitting on this dis who got any [00:02:12] illegal subpoena. you turned it over [00:02:14] with no process at all. So, let's skip [00:02:15] that part. Just get to the part where [00:02:17] you tell me why you didn't do anything [00:02:19] that Mr. Mcatee did. [00:02:21] >> Senator, the process we have in place [00:02:23] now would largely [00:02:24] >> I'm not interested in that. I'm [00:02:25] interested in why you didn't do any of [00:02:28] the basic [00:02:30] investigation, ask a question, you get a [00:02:32] subpoena for all of these numbers. And I [00:02:35] and your testimony is you just handed [00:02:37] over the documents. You didn't do [00:02:38] anything. [00:02:39] >> Is that what happened? [00:02:40] >> Three reasons. Uh, Senator, so first, [00:02:43] when we receive a subpoena, we do not [00:02:45] know the nature of the investigation or [00:02:48] the sensitivities involved. Second, as I [00:02:50] mentioned, we train our subpoena [00:02:52] analysts to respect the confidentiality [00:02:55] and the privacy of our [00:02:57] >> So, you don't try to match up you don't [00:02:58] look and match up the numbers. You're [00:02:59] telling me you don't you don't try to [00:03:00] associate a number with a name. You [00:03:02] don't do that. [00:03:03] >> No, Senator, we do now for members of [00:03:05] Congress, but that was not the procedure [00:03:07] at the time. [00:03:08] >> Really? because you testified to Senator [00:03:09] Durban not long ago that you disclosed [00:03:11] all of the names to this committee of [00:03:13] all of the people who are associated [00:03:14] with the numbers including mine. So [00:03:16] clearly you had the ability to do it. [00:03:18] You just didn't do it. Is that correct? [00:03:21] >> We had the ability to do it yet. Yes. [00:03:23] >> But you didn't do it. [00:03:24] >> We we which we and we thought we had [00:03:26] good reasons for that. Some [00:03:27] >> Why is that? You don't have any problem [00:03:29] associating names with accounts when you [00:03:31] go to bill people, which you do every [00:03:33] month. I seem to recall getting a bill [00:03:35] from you monthly. You had no problem [00:03:37] associating my name with my number when [00:03:39] you wanted money from me. But when it [00:03:41] came to protecting the basic rights of [00:03:43] your consumers, your subscribers, your [00:03:46] customers, you couldn't be bothered. [00:03:49] >> No, Senator, I would not say that. [00:03:51] >> I would. I think I just did. [00:03:54] >> I would, too. [00:03:56] >> Senator, [00:03:57] >> why did you follow the contract that you [00:04:00] have with the United States government? [00:04:01] You've got a contract worth millions of [00:04:03] dollars with the United States [00:04:05] government which obligates you to inform [00:04:08] the sergeant-at-arms if you get any [00:04:10] requests for process or information from [00:04:12] a senator or any number associated with [00:04:14] that contract. That contract was in [00:04:17] place and that language was in place [00:04:19] when these subpoena requests came [00:04:20] through and you didn't do any of it. Why [00:04:23] is that? [00:04:24] >> Senator, I don't agree that we don't [00:04:26] agree with what [00:04:26] >> that we violated the contract. [00:04:28] >> Really? contract says that you are [00:04:30] obliged to inform the Senate when any [00:04:32] records are demanded. And I'm quoting [00:04:33] here from a a letter not from Senator [00:04:35] Graham, not from a Republican. It's from [00:04:38] Senator Ron Weiden, who sent a dear [00:04:40] colleague letter to every member of the [00:04:41] United States Senate May 21st, 2025, [00:04:44] notifying us that these contract terms [00:04:46] were being regularly violated by your [00:04:48] company, among others. So why didn't you [00:04:50] follow the contract that you were making [00:04:52] millions of dollars on? Why didn't you [00:04:54] do that? Senator, I I I get your [00:04:56] frustration with this issue. But the the [00:04:59] contract [00:04:59] >> No, I just want the truth. I'm [00:05:00] frustrated because we get the runaround [00:05:03] constantly. We've gotten it all day from [00:05:05] you. So why didn't you follow the [00:05:06] contract, [00:05:07] >> Senator? The the the contract covers a [00:05:11] definition of Senate data. At this time, [00:05:14] we did not interpret the contract to [00:05:17] apply to the kind to the kind of records [00:05:20] that Verizon generates as opposed to [00:05:22] records. [00:05:24] This is just absurd. And I'll just say [00:05:25] this, Madam Chair. We're talking here [00:05:27] about members of Congress. If you are a [00:05:29] normal person, if you are a working [00:05:30] person out there, just think of the fact [00:05:32] that these guys, with one exception, Mr. [00:05:34] Mcatee's company, AT&T, all the other [00:05:37] guys just handed over this data. They [00:05:39] couldn't do it fast enough. They rushed [00:05:41] to do it. They can find you when they [00:05:43] want to bill you. They can find you in a [00:05:44] heartbeat. When it comes time to protect [00:05:46] your data, they're nowhere to be found. [00:05:48] It is absolutely a disgrace. And the [00:05:51] fact that you testified earlier that you [00:05:52] get hundreds of thousands of requests [00:05:54] for personal information every year is [00:05:56] chilling because what all your customers [00:05:58] should know is you just turn it over [00:06:00] willy-nilly. [00:06:01] I would expect better from you from all [00:06:04] of you. Frankly, I think what you've [00:06:06] done here is outrageous and I think the [00:06:07] implications for the privacy of the [00:06:09] American people are absolutely [00:06:11] unbelievable. Thank you, Mr. Mcate, for [00:06:13] protecting your customers. I wish these [00:06:16] other guys would do the same. And I tell [00:06:17] you what, everybody ought to go to AT&T [00:06:19] because Verizon and whoever you are, [00:06:21] T-Mobile, you guys are terrible.