I've yet to see any of you recall that EADS won round 2. Regardless of your predispositions, that should be evidence enough that it was not a shoe-in for Boeing.
So, you don't think it was fixed when
a) EADS won
b) politicians didn't like it
c) competition CHANGED to favour Boeing solution
I run a load of competitions, and you can't normally just go changing the goal posts* once you have firm bids in. No matter how you dress it up, the outcome was effectively determined by the shift in criteria to favour a smaller, 767 based, offering.
For the reasons LO allude to though, it seems EADS (though not Northrop, interestingly, who have no relevant civil aerospace interest) were content to go along with it to squeeze any potential excessive profit/"subsidy" to Boeing.
* not without exposing yourself to legal challenge, bid costs etc. Did Northrop recover their costs under the 2008 award?