This looks like a motte-and-bailey. Your original comment, the bailey: "he posted much religious stuff from official Intel accounts". This comment, the motte: "he posted much religious stuff".

You could've just said, "I thought it was extremely strange that he posted so much religious stuff while CEO". That would've been a very defensible position. You didn't need the false part of posting from official Intel accounts.

Or, if it was an honest mistake, you should've written something along the lines of: "Sorry, I misremembered, it was his personal accounts. But when you're a CEO, I don't think the distinction matters much; anything you post will be read as 'Intel's CEO says'".