How do you square this view with the share price going down on the news, so he was literally not doing his job per your definition of the job?

▲

joegibbs a day ago | parent [-]

Down because people assumed that he would be sacked (or would be investigated or found guilty of espionage), recovered a bit after he's actually out because uncertainty is worse than a bad outcome. I think it would've recovered anyway if he didn't leave.

	▲	eviks a day ago \| parent [-]
		That doesn't help. Why wouldn't it be his job to conduct his life in a way where people avoid making such assumptions because those assumptions decrease returns to shareholders?