zlacker

>>davidb+(OP)
It doesn't have to be that he was actually caught in a scandal. It could be that the board was investigating some serious accusation, and he was not cooperative and forthright, which they might have no patience for.

I invented a saying to describe this common occurrence: "Sometimes the cover-up is worse than the crime."

>>khazho+f8
It could have been a military contract with a gag order: Sam wasn’t forthright because he couldn’t.

>>bertil+6F
Agreeing to that would be a very good reason for a board to sack him.

>>frabcu+aG
And he probably wouldn’t approve unless there was a specific use case that he thought mandated an exception. Recent international news provide some inspiration.