Subject: Re: Please see the proposed budget attached.
From: Cheryl Mills <[email-masked]>
To: John Podesta <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2012 13:44:05 -0500

Thank god you made me laugh about this.

I feel like we are just replacing one disfunction with another.  And I
am going to tell him that to no avail, but why not?  I think he needs
different leadership for his PO operation.

I called Victoria to re apportionment on things like IT, HR,
corespondence - which as we all know is fine b/c we have been doing it
but what we now also know is how imprefectly that accounting was being
done (e.g., correspondence reported to justin that very little if any
time was spent on non-foundation matters so they didn't need to turn
in any hours).

She said fine but said there always is audit risk that will show
inaccurate apportionment hence why most folks of privilge just prefer
to pay it themselves to avoid the risk.

sigh.

He's of course out despite an agreed time to speak at noon (and still
not back yet) so I know this will drag on until tonight.

cdm

On 1/25/12, John Podesta <[email-masked]> wrote:
> Can we do an HBO movie when this is all over?
>
> On Tue, Jan 24, 2012 at 9:37 PM, Cheryl Mills <[email-masked]>
> wrote:
>>
>> just so you know . . .
>>
>> cdm
>> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
>> From: Cheryl Mills <[email-masked]>
>> Date: Tue, Jan 24, 2012 at 9:33 PM
>> Subject: Re: Please see the proposed budget attached.
>> To: Laura Graham <[email-masked]>
>>
>>
>> 1.  did not know it was your sister - thought ana was your assistant so
>> not
>> personal nor reference to trying to do something re your sister so dial
>> back
>> the hurt given my ignorance of that fact.
>>
>> 2.  happy to add back.
>>
>> 3.  ana job is not going to be that big though -- b/c much more of this
>> job
>> is your leadership and judgement -- you will not be doing nor needing to
>> do
>> as much operational -- you will need to be doing more of his alter ego and
>> judgment.  if you find your self writing or doing as opposed to advising
>> --
>> we're doing it wrong.
>>
>> 4.  in the end we all keep forgetting one thing -- wjc and hrc do a lot of
>> giving, to their family, to their staff, and to their friends.  They are
>> trying to be better partners to the foundation and save some of their
>> resources -- not an unreasonable thing for them to choose to do given
>> where
>> they are, how much they've made and how little they have saved.  Folks
>> seem
>> to be forgetting that and part of my role here is to offer a clea-reyed
>> picture of their expenses and their needs -- so they can layer on their
>> wants and their choices.  I am quite sure if he knows you won't come w/o
>> your sister, he'll do it b/c that is who he is.  And we shouldn't blame
>> him
>> for the other personnel choices he makes that may not seem in his best
>> financial interest either.
>>
>> cdm
>>
>> cdm
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Jan 24, 2012 at 9:19 PM, Laura Graham
>> <[email-masked]> wrote:
>>>
>>> Removing bc partly personal. Greg makes 80k or 87k. His actual salary was
>>> listed. Its either 80 or 87. I need an assistant. I won't go wo one. I
>>> cannot do this all by myself. And the operations person cannot do Helen's
>>> role (operations) and service me. 2 separate and full time roles. Plus
>>> she's
>>> my sister so you're suggesting we fire her and so then I just got a
>>> paycut
>>> of what she makes since I would then have to support her and her family.
>>> He's aware of my situation, aware she works for me and why and so this
>>> really hurtful that you would 1. Think I don't need an assistant, a
>>> position
>>> I need and would demand even if she wasn't my sister. Think of you wo
>>> Joanne
>>> or Nora. 2. And that we fire my sister bc Bruce won't want her. This job
>>> as
>>> I've been told by all involved is supposed to be a promotion w doug's
>>> portfolio and more responsibility and you're cutting my legs beneath me.
>>> Which is it bc it sounding more and more like a job w less
>>> responsibility. I
>>> am not comfortable w this as the minimum and won't make the move with
>>> this.
>>> Ill call him tomorrow morning if need be. I won't go wo Ana and Michelle.
>>> Everyone else had there demands. These are mine and they are more than
>>> reasonable.
>>>
>>> ________________________________
>>> From: Cheryl Mills <[email-masked]>
>>> To: Laura Graham
>>> Cc: [email-masked] <[email-masked]>; Bruce Lindsey;
>>> Cheryl
>>> Mills <[email-masked]>
>>> Sent: Tue Jan 24 21:02:56 2012
>>> Subject: Re: Please see the proposed budget attached.
>>>
>>> my take attached.
>>>
>>> i would present this as minimum (but not recommended).
>>>
>>> what is greg milne's current salary?  I am assuming more like 100K so
>>> that
>>> is why highlighted b/c would want to adjust.
>>>
>>> am assuming hannah gets to be director of external affairs at the
>>> foundation - otherwise, this entire frame increases by her salary.
>>>
>>> cdm
>>>
>>> On Tue, Jan 24, 2012 at 4:40 PM, Laura Graham
>>> <[email-masked]> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Laura Graham
>>>>
>>>> Chief Operating Officer
>>>>
>>>> & Chief of Staff to President Clinton
>>>>
>>>> The Clinton Foundation
>>>>
>>>> 77 Water St, NY, NY 10005
>>>>
>>>> 212-348-1779 phone
>>>>
>>>> 866-693-0715 fax
>>>>
>>>> [email-masked]
>>>>
>>>> [email-masked]
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Please consider the environment before printing this e-mail
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>