Download raw source

Delivered-To: john.podesta@gmail.com Received: by 10.25.80.78 with SMTP id e75csp58831lfb; Sat, 18 Oct 2014 12:46:00 -0700 (PDT) Return-Path: <cheryl.mills@gmail.com> Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of cheryl.mills@gmail.com designates 10.194.103.74 as permitted sender) client-ip=10.194.103.74 Authentication-Results: mr.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of cheryl.mills@gmail.com designates 10.194.103.74 as permitted sender) smtp.mail=cheryl.mills@gmail.com; dkim=pass header.i=@gmail.com X-Received: from mr.google.com ([10.194.103.74]) by 10.194.103.74 with SMTP id fu10mr17570353wjb.0.1413661560924 (num_hops = 1); Sat, 18 Oct 2014 12:46:00 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=HZh37trNlF5Jlo4Gfwwugv24sPSwpGmYNIhNEb5XL84=; b=G9qvm1eTg0qM4fDT3Fx0OnUu4sx9BO3+ptGkuZmTWzE0cAXn4V7vf+Y/A64+Mj1mSy IoEjooP6B86+ujPko29XQ4d3ZoV9rw8RY3L8fMludcR/hlD3LwpeVjFZJuQ4MxBh7tmk yn2RuRrqDnuzKmQ4lCHS7aq3+nezbgBGmKzLj0PXpKfSrd6uvwdfusdrs2Yl0JW0ErAx tLc4T5+4am0QJeekaqsyUSZbrPxWQhS3Hknem0vRGj0BrISLnhTO0398nEV9XKZCZsKl sMmDl3x4Kp3oj5I8OS1IdG2C81PxOfJ6oG3VEaU0acWlfD9B9IgWnLLNp5EwrKU0RZu9 /Tgg== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.194.103.74 with SMTP id fu10mr21019745wjb.0.1413661560810; Sat, 18 Oct 2014 12:46:00 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.194.242.67 with HTTP; Sat, 18 Oct 2014 12:46:00 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <CAE6FiQ8w7QY_5Bb+KdTDxTvQLqtL1a4T8K0R22BNLg8iQnPAcA@mail.gmail.com> References: <CA+NiFyP_ZnQCTXvgResC46JxoYossPAyOV6_vaMVNkRJa5Unuw@mail.gmail.com> <CAE6FiQ8w7QY_5Bb+KdTDxTvQLqtL1a4T8K0R22BNLg8iQnPAcA@mail.gmail.com> Date: Sat, 18 Oct 2014 15:46:00 -0400 Message-ID: <CALk44aDRaZyD6gqOayaqPETF3jjRmOK42kMyKuAx-+vUzMAM1A@mail.gmail.com> Subject: Re: Follow up on the call From: Cheryl Mills <cheryl.mills@gmail.com> To: John Podesta <john.podesta@gmail.com> CC: Robert Mook <robbymook@gmail.com>, David Plouffe <daplouffe@icloud.com>, H <hrod17@clintonemail.com> Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=089e010d7fb82a31860505b7bb4b --089e010d7fb82a31860505b7bb4b Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 SGE's, like WHO employees, are permitted to engage in political activity on their own time. They may not use government resources to do such activity. takes me back to the old days. any way, they are not restricted by the Hatch Act. best. cdm On Sat, Oct 18, 2014 at 2:51 PM, John Podesta <john.podesta@gmail.com> wrote: > Talked to Todd. He's enthusiastic (and discreet). I think he will be very > valuable on recruitment. I need to ck with WH Counsel on what rules apply > to WH SGE's, but I don't think that will be a problem. > On Oct 17, 2014 11:18 AM, "Robert Mook" <robbymook@gmail.com> wrote: > >> Great call today. Cheryl, so you're up to speed, we discussed a few >> action items: >> >> 1. John is going to talk to Todd Park about being an overall advisor on >> tech >> 2. David is going to reach out to Teddy Goff about doing an assessment of >> where we are and where we need to be >> 3. We are going to report back on the IT recommendations that Rajeev >> writes up and get a process going for him to look at the potential office >> spaces. >> >> Big picture, I was thinking it might make sense to do a series of >> organized conversations like the one we just had around other key functions >> of the campaign. I think it might help to get her up to speed on the >> latest planning and give her the opportunity to weigh in on next steps and >> ensure we're getting input from the right people. She seems comfortable >> migrating from a closed to a more open planning process, so I want to make >> sure we're incorporating everyone she wants. >> >> Then we can move to hiring. >> >> I'm thinking for each topic we could cover the following three things: >> >> --Strategy next steps: review what planning has already taken place and >> what work remains to be done; >> >> --Staff recruitment: who she wants us to connect with on staff recruitment >> >> --Key action items: key next steps, from her perspective and ours >> >> I'd propose going in the following order: >> >> 1. Technology/Digital >> 2. Finance >> 3. Communications (earned media) >> 4. Paid Media >> 5. Political >> 6. Analytics >> 7. States >> >> Thoughts? Do we think this is something we could slot into her open >> times after Election Day? >> >> --089e010d7fb82a31860505b7bb4b Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable <div dir=3D"ltr">SGE's, like WHO employees, are permitted to engage in = political activity on their own time.<div><br></div><div>They may not use g= overnment resources to do such activity.</div><div><br></div><div>takes me = back to the old days.</div><div><br></div><div>any way, they are not restri= cted by the Hatch Act.</div><div><br></div><div>best.</div><div><br></div><= div>cdm</div></div><div class=3D"gmail_extra"><br><div class=3D"gmail_quote= ">On Sat, Oct 18, 2014 at 2:51 PM, John Podesta <span dir=3D"ltr"><<a hr= ef=3D"mailto:john.podesta@gmail.com" target=3D"_blank">john.podesta@gmail.c= om</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"marg= in:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><p dir=3D"ltr">T= alked to Todd. He's enthusiastic (and discreet). I think he will be ver= y valuable on recruitment. I need to ck with WH Counsel on what rules apply= to WH SGE's, but I don't think that will be a problem. </p><div cl= ass=3D"HOEnZb"><div class=3D"h5"> <div class=3D"gmail_quote">On Oct 17, 2014 11:18 AM, "Robert Mook"= ; <<a href=3D"mailto:robbymook@gmail.com" target=3D"_blank">robbymook@gm= ail.com</a>> wrote:<br type=3D"attribution"><blockquote class=3D"gmail_q= uote" style=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1e= x"><div dir=3D"ltr"><div>Great call today.=A0 Cheryl, so you're up to s= peed, we discussed a few action items:</div><div><br></div><div>1. John is = going to talk to Todd Park about being an overall advisor on tech</div><div= >2. David is going to reach out to Teddy Goff about doing an assessment of = where we are and where we need to be</div><div>3. We are going to report ba= ck on the IT recommendations that Rajeev writes up and get a process going = for him to look at the potential office spaces.</div><div><br></div><div>Bi= g picture, I was thinking it might make sense to do a series of organized c= onversations like the one we just had around other key functions of the cam= paign.=A0 I think it might help to get her up to speed on the latest planni= ng and give her the opportunity to weigh in on next steps and ensure we'= ;re getting input from the right people.=A0 She seems comfortable migrating= from a closed to a more open planning process, so I want to make sure we&#= 39;re incorporating everyone she wants. =A0</div><div><br></div><div>Then w= e can move to hiring.</div><div><br></div><div>I'm thinking for each to= pic we could cover the following three things:</div><div><br></div><div>--S= trategy next steps: review what planning has already taken place and what w= ork remains to be done;</div><div><br></div><div>--Staff recruitment: who s= he wants us to connect with on staff recruitment</div><div><br></div><div>-= -Key action items: key next steps, from her perspective and ours</div><div>= <br></div><div>I'd propose going in the following order:</div><div><ol>= <li>Technology/Digital</li><li>Finance</li><li>Communications (earned media= )</li><li>Paid Media</li><li>Political=A0<br></li><li>Analytics</li><li>Sta= tes</li></ol></div><div>Thoughts?=A0 Do we think this is something we could= slot into her open times after Election Day?</div><div><br></div></div> </blockquote></div> </div></div></blockquote></div><br></div> --089e010d7fb82a31860505b7bb4b--