◆ SpookStack

--Original Message--- From: will, Candice M. (Do) FBI) Sent: Thursday, November 03, 2016 2:08 PM To: (NY) (FBI) Cc: McNamaraNancy INsD_FBI) ; Kortan, Michael P. DO) FBI) Quinn, Richard P. (DO) (FBI) INSDFBI (DO) (FBI) Subject: RE: gq alleging violations of the Hatch Act and D0 policy. The following morning (yesterday. morning), I responded to also via email, that I was referring his complaint to. the Inspection Division and that the matter would be referred to my office after the completion of an investigation. I did not mean to intimate that an investigation would be undertaken, only that if INsd investigated, the matter would be referred to my office after. the investigation was concluded. If it was construed to say more than I intended, that is. afternoon asking whether an investigation had been opened, which I referred to OPA, cc'ing. Candice -Original Message- From: ](NY) (FBI) Sent: Thursday, November 03, 2016 12:33 PM To: (INSD)(FBI) will, Candice M. (DO) (FBI) 9q Cc: ](DO) (FBI) Subject: Fw: uo paaty aq on swnns eopan aan neyn anaa! ue uo anuepnng aens sn apnaoad uen noe Bugdne today. We are getting multiple inquiries on a rumor that the Fbi's Inspection Division is. looking at why a tweet went out on our twitter feed essentially promoting to the public a FOIA release that showed the Bill Clinton pardon of Marc Rich was investigated by the FBI. The allegation among some in the media is that the FBI was promoting the news. But if you Iook below, it was actually an automated function that got the news out to the public. A complicating factor is that I believe Candice will may have responded to someone about the *uonnennnnng annndnonng uo aunnenado we I se anrpuen duoam s! uonnennnnn! Aw d! azglonode b5 b6 Candice - Thank you, anything you have could help us respond to the media accurately.. 2