What? A couple of points. The whitehouse blocked any disclosures of discussions / pressure even to the inspector general. They also issued notices to staff not

What? A couple of points. The whitehouse blocked any disclosures of discussions / pressure even to the inspector general. They also issued notices to staff not to talk to IG. That's a pretty darn good sign that there WAS involvement by the whitehouse. The DoD is dropping this case because they were asked to reveal some of this information. Instead of disclosing it, they elect to cancel the contract. This was a specific issue in the current case, would DoD have to reveal this type of communication from whitehouse. Yes - people claim no pressure / no involvement - but it's blindingly obvious that there is a very good chance there was pressure. I have past experience with govt contracting so have a sense for what the flows look like. Contract selection put on hold, involvement of a political person (probably esper here). Ban on anyone talking about the potential discussion to internal auditors. Those are all the red flags.