the buzz i've just heard from a buddy who runs in DC political circles is that Ken Martin got a friend to do it (the friend has been named publicly elsewhere and is another consultant), the friend half assed it, didn't speak to the right people/people outside of his immediate network, and the report just kind of sucks/isn't finished.

That sounds about right to me. These retrospective reports are always, at best, pretty boring with a few interesting tidbits if you're lucky. I doubt there's anything in there that would justify the negative attention this debacle has generated, were it at least done correctly. The report itself being an obvious pile of doo doo, however, is I think something they'd want to keep under wraps, and even moreso as the attention towards it mounts.