Well, he is a failure as a systems manager if something that important and that was requested by his office did not end up with his people. Either that or he is an immoral liar playing a grand game of CYA.
I understand that throwing outrageous definitive statements around about things like this is grand sport on forums but reasonability, fairness, and logic would dictate prudence. If the man is incompetent or of poor character he will pay the price once all of the relevent evidence is in hand, but leaping to the conclusion that he is "Either that or he is an immoral liar playing a grand game of CYA."
is unsupported at this time. Constructing an opinion upon unfolding events in real time is foolish and unfair.
I don't have a dog in this fight as I gave up on the premier pro sports years ago, but it bothers me to see folks engage in a feeding frenzy mentality. Ice, with your post you've made leaps of logic that are unsupported at this time. It does no one good to allow emotionally driven attacks supplant one's reason.
I've never run a org with 1800+ people, but I have run 450+ companies and I do know that there has never been born a person that could 'know' what each of his/her staff is doing/accepting/saying/directing at all times. Managing is both art and science, personality driven and societally driven. Sometimes the situation allows for the the control a leader has to be direct and immediate, while most times it is more like pushing on the end of a string. One of the most difficult issues to deal with as a leader is that the larger the organization grows, the more that falls into the 'string pushing' side of the equation.
The tools of principles, mentoring, and the transparent display of the leader's personal character all fall in the string pushing side of the equation. Internal processes attempt to effect positive outcomes but they too are subject to all to frequent failure. Choosing which person is hired is and will always be a process that is susceptible to failure. People fail others with every tick of the clock as we are all imperfect. If just one of those 1800+ that this man leads fails him, you would have him declared a poor and/or immoral leader. Tell me of the person that you've met that could meet the standard to which you hold him? I'm not saying that I believe him to be innocent, competent, incompetent, reasonable, truthful, untruthful, of good character, or of bad character... what I am saying is that it is far to early to draw conclusions that could tarnish another's reputation.
I would suggest that we all let it play out. Allow the time needed for the facts to become visable and understood. To get a reasonable understanding of the relevent facts, take time to consider them and the issue in full context. And then, and only then begin to construct an opinion. There is no need to rush as rushing doesn't bring better outcomes... the best it can do is merely match a more prudent and cautious approach whereas a more prudent and cautious approach often produces superior outcomes.
So, again, let these things take the time they need to fully develop. None of us could know enough of what truly has happened to reach reasonable conclusions yet. Something stinks and there is more smoke than is dismissible but leaping to conclusions before we get a fuller understanding of the events is a worthless endeavor and it often treads into the frenzied land of mob mentality.