> this is not true

What experience or reporting are you basing this on?

> They are not 'investigating the CEO' - they are investigating the situation

This is how all independent investigations by a Board are phrased. Because half the time, you don't fire the CEO. Would you say walking into a meeting where you have a 50% chance of being fired is a nothing burger?

> the misrepresentative nature of your comment proves my point

I think I'm pretty clearly representing what a lot of folks on this thread are misunderstanding, willfully or ignorantly, about the nature of this sort of a Board action.