My guess is that is it is just very politically sensitive without a proper narrative; I think the one I gave is the way forward, since as we recognize near everyone does come out a winner.
There is however a couple important losers: The financial institutions that want to take FnF's place in housing insurance and the people in the previous admin who were associated with these woeful policies.
So in my view we need to drop the narrative of blame to get a something politically acceptable going. Saying the previous admin did ''illegal'', ''criminal'', etc. can actually act against us because it builds an opposition with a reputation on the line. If instead we push the idea that was simply a policy we disagree with then its not as damaging to political actors cozy with the previous admin. Much as they put in place extremely ideological, ignorant and overall damaging policies.
Market Data 
Markets 
AI
