Entrenched government agencies never appear to have concern about public credibility. Their security is guaranteed not by the public but by politicians, and these same politicians are the beneficiaries of donations by large corporations like Boeing. Further, large corporations employ lots of people who would be rather pissed off if they lost their job. So by punishing the large corporation, the agency would in effect be giving an incentive to its key stakeholder (politicians) an incentive to punish the agency (limiting authority, etc).
The world is a messed up place, where agencies tasked to do a very specific thing undermine that task out of self-preservation.
The 737 Max and A320neo are direct competitors. The A320neo was announced 6 months before the 737 Max in 2011, and both were certified for flight in March 2017. (Give or take - the A320neo has a few variants.)
Back when the 737 was first grounded, initial investigation found that Boeing and the FAA cooperated to rush the 737 into service to beat the A320neo [1,2].
The FAA has every incentive to make sure that American companies, especially large ones like Boeing, are treated favorably. Even outside of donations or smells of corruption, Boeing is a major employer and S&P500 member. If Boeing does well, our economic metrics (employment/stocks) do well, and the lawmakers who regulate the FAA are happy.
Those same incentives appeared in the FAA's refusal to ground the Max for days after the second crash. (First crash was 8/29/18; second was 3/10/19; grounded 3/13/19)[3]
I suspect we're seeing a replay of the original certification. As soon as the 737 Max is recertified, all those grounded planes can get back to making a profit, and Boeing can go back to making them.
Not how it should work, but the recertification effort seems consistent with how Boeing and the FAA acted in the initial certification. It's not right, but the same incentives still exist.
Just my $0.02.
[1] https://www.seattletimes.com/business/boeing-aerospace/faile...
[2] https://www.politico.com/story/2019/03/21/congress-faa-boein...
[3] https://www.npr.org/2019/03/13/702936894/ethiopian-pilot-had...
>being complicit in the cover up?
Guess what common sense says.
Do Boeing contribute funding to the FAA in a direct and discretionary way?
I can't comprehend how a federal body would aid a private company like this when the ramifications could be so severe (threat to life and to the FAA's public credibility).