Solyndra Said to Have Violated Terms of Its U.S. Loan

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 28, 2011 1:59 PM GMT
    More on the greenwashing of the stimulus. It is apparently nice to be politically connected when the government decides to spend a lot of taxpayer dollars.

    http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970204422404576596601891250510.html?mod=WSJ_hp_MIDDLENexttoWhatsNewsForth

    Solyndra LLC had such steep financial problems in late 2010 that the company violated terms of its loan-guarantee agreement with the Department of Energy and technically defaulted on its $535 million loan, according to people familiar with the matter.

    The failed solar-panel maker, which is under numerous criminal and congressional investigations, ran so short of cash in December 2010 that it was unable to satisfy certain terms of its U.S. loan agreement, these people said. The agreement required Solyndra to provide $5 million in equity to a subsidiary building its factory but cash-flow problems prevented those payments.

    The Energy Department ultimately restructured the loan agreement to help keep the company afloat and Solyndra continued to draw money from its loan.

    Solyndra's cash-flow problems in late 2010 had previously come to light but it was not known that the company technically defaulted on its loan and violated its agreement with the U.S. government.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 28, 2011 2:38 PM GMT
    Much will be made by the Democrats of the company's actions in an attempt to take away focus from the actions by this administration. This is shaping up to be a major scandal that will call into question the stimulus program, the wasting of money on pet projects, and the judgement and integrity of senior officials all the way up the chain of command.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 28, 2011 8:15 PM GMT
    socalfitness saidMuch will be made by the Democrats of the company's actions in an attempt to take away focus from the actions by this administration. This is shaping up to be a major scandal that will call into question the stimulus program, the wasting of money on pet projects, and the judgement and integrity of senior officials all the way up the chain of command.


    What I find practically insane is the call to spend even more on companies like this in an attempt to kick start the economy again.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 29, 2011 1:48 PM GMT
    Delightful. Four more solar panel manufacturing companies who have significant ties to the Democratic Party are the beneficiaries of more than 500M in loan guarantees each from the Obama Administration.

    http://dailycaller.com/2011/09/29/more-solar-companies-led-by-democratic-donors-received-federal-loan-guarantees/

    A Daily Caller investigation has found that in addition to the failed company Solyndra, at least four other solar panel manufacturing companies receiving in excess of $500 million in loan guarantees from the Obama administration employ executives or board members who have donated large sums of money to Democratic campaigns.

    And as questions swirl around possible connections between political donations and these preferential financing arrangements, the Obama White House suddenly began deflecting The Daily Caller’s questions on Wednesday to the Democratic National Committee.

    Asked Wednesday to comment on the connection between large Democratic donors and Obama administration loan guarantees to the companies they represent, the White House responded to TheDC with a single sentence: “We refer your question to the Democratic National Committee.”

    Concerns about the long-term viability of Solyndra, first made public by The Daily Caller back in February, have now expanded to include the financial health of other loan-guarantee recipient firms as well.

    These companies have suffered from declining stock prices despite their favored status in the White House. Yet as the end of the federal government’s fiscal year looms on Friday, a new series of loans could be finalized amounting to more than nine times what taxpayers have already lost on the failed company Solyndra.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 29, 2011 3:50 PM GMT
    Looks like the (D)s are just trying to play by the (R)s rules.

    Haliburton anyone?


    Yeah, exactly.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 29, 2011 4:20 PM GMT
    ConfederateGhost saidLooks like the (D)s are just trying to play by the (R)s rules.

    Haliburton anyone?


    Yeah, exactly.




    I lol-ed.

    -Doug
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 29, 2011 5:09 PM GMT
    Haliburton will not be a factor in 2012. icon_rolleyes.gif
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 29, 2011 5:28 PM GMT
    If Perry is the GOP candidate, Merk and Cintra baby....
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 29, 2011 5:46 PM GMT
    southbeach1500 saidUnfortunately, the media is pretty much burying the Solyndra mess, this as we just learn that another solar company where Nancy Pelosi's brother-in-law has a substantial interest is getting even MORE money than Solyndra:

    The Obama Administration is giving $737 million to a Tonopah Solar, a subsidiary of California-based SolarReserve. PCG is an investment partner with SolarReserve. Nancy Pelosi’s brother-in-law happens to be the number two man at PCG.

    http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2011/09/more-crony-socialism-obama-gives-737-million-to-pelosis-brother-in-laws-solar-firm/

    Even if much of the traditional media is rooting for the Democrats, they won't be able to keep all this buried. Once the other outlets give it significant air time, plus with Internet based media, the traditional ones will have to begrudgingly follow suit.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 29, 2011 9:18 PM GMT
    socalfitness said
    southbeach1500 saidUnfortunately, the media is pretty much burying the Solyndra mess, this as we just learn that another solar company where Nancy Pelosi's brother-in-law has a substantial interest is getting even MORE money than Solyndra:

    The Obama Administration is giving $737 million to a Tonopah Solar, a subsidiary of California-based SolarReserve. PCG is an investment partner with SolarReserve. Nancy Pelosi’s brother-in-law happens to be the number two man at PCG.

    http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2011/09/more-crony-socialism-obama-gives-737-million-to-pelosis-brother-in-laws-solar-firm/

    Even if much of the traditional media is rooting for the Democrats, they won't be able to keep all this buried. Once the other outlets give it significant air time, plus with Internet based media, the traditional ones will have to begrudgingly follow suit.


    The real scandal that isn't being covered is "Operation Fast and Furious" and "Gunwalker". Watergate didn't have bodies. Those do.
  • conservativej...

    Posts: 2465

    Sep 29, 2011 11:57 PM GMT
    Well it seems Solyndra's helpmate down in LA is slowly assembling the bidding procedures to file with the bankruptcy court in San Francisco. Perhaps a 20 cent on the dollar purchase would be a good thing. That is if the Communist in San Franciso don't prevent you from relocating the factory.

    Ho Hum.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 30, 2011 3:18 AM GMT
    I'm all for investigating our government. I do not believe they have been forthcoming or completely honest with the American People. I don't care what letter they carry after their name, (D) or (R).

    If we are going to go after the Obama Admin. for this...you better damn well believe we better go after the Bush Admin. as well. Dick Cheney deserves to be behind bars for ransacking our nation for his personal gains. You wanna talk about body count? Haliburton racks some pretty sweet numbers up themselves.

    Since I could keep up with politics and understand it (back during the second Clinton Admin) there hasn't been a time when there wasn't a President waving troops off to war. Clinton had a lot of "minor" ones, which add up (like Kosovo and Somalia); Bush heralded in the wars of Iraq and Afghanistan; and Obama, mixing us up in the "Arab Spring", where we now have had troops involved in Libya, next probably Syria, or Yemen. Who is profiting? I'm damn sure not. Are any of you?



  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Oct 01, 2011 2:49 AM GMT
    socalfitness said
    southbeach1500 saidUnfortunately, the media is pretty much burying the Solyndra mess, this as we just learn that another solar company where Nancy Pelosi's brother-in-law has a substantial interest is getting even MORE money than Solyndra:

    The Obama Administration is giving $737 million to a Tonopah Solar, a subsidiary of California-based SolarReserve. PCG is an investment partner with SolarReserve. Nancy Pelosi’s brother-in-law happens to be the number two man at PCG.

    http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2011/09/more-crony-socialism-obama-gives-737-million-to-pelosis-brother-in-laws-solar-firm/

    Even if much of the traditional media is rooting for the Democrats, they won't be able to keep all this buried. Once the other outlets give it significant air time, plus with Internet based media, the traditional ones will have to begrudgingly follow suit.

    Just an update - in addition to Fox News, ABC and LA Times have provided good coverage. The rest of the media outlets, except for MSNBC, will undoubtedly follow suit reporting this and the other evolving scandals.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Oct 01, 2011 1:10 PM GMT
    ConfederateGhost saidI'm all for investigating our government. I do not believe they have been forthcoming or completely honest with the American People. I don't care what letter they carry after their name, (D) or (R).

    If we are going to go after the Obama Admin. for this...you better damn well believe we better go after the Bush Admin. as well. Dick Cheney deserves to be behind bars for ransacking our nation for his personal gains. You wanna talk about body count? Haliburton racks some pretty sweet numbers up themselves.

    Since I could keep up with politics and understand it (back during the second Clinton Admin) there hasn't been a time when there wasn't a President waving troops off to war. Clinton had a lot of "minor" ones, which add up (like Kosovo and Somalia); Bush heralded in the wars of Iraq and Afghanistan; and Obama, mixing us up in the "Arab Spring", where we now have had troops involved in Libya, next probably Syria, or Yemen. Who is profiting? I'm damn sure not. Are any of you?


    The problem isn't so much the scandal. I think most people are pragmatic enough to get the idea that when you spend a lot of money you're bound to have a bit of corruption. The issue is the spending and the fact that this Administration despite these past mistakes will neither own up to them that they are in fact mistakes but are even proposing a new round of spending.

    The solution? Spend less or at least clearly define what the role of government should be. The problem is that you have people here who get all defensive about government spending pointing at the potential cuts to teachers and the cops as a diversion to spend more money here on this fluff. Government should not be playing venture capitalist.

    As for Haliburton - you will find that Cheney has not benefited since leaving his position there. In fact if you even look at the chart of the company it's unclear that even shareholders have benefited there. That's not true for the pay to play scandals like they're looking like with the billions being spent on solar and I suspect that's just the beginning given how large the spending programs have been for "stimulus".
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Oct 01, 2011 1:50 PM GMT
    riddler78 said
    ConfederateGhost saidI'm all for investigating our government. I do not believe they have been forthcoming or completely honest with the American People. I don't care what letter they carry after their name, (D) or (R).

    If we are going to go after the Obama Admin. for this...you better damn well believe we better go after the Bush Admin. as well. Dick Cheney deserves to be behind bars for ransacking our nation for his personal gains. You wanna talk about body count? Haliburton racks some pretty sweet numbers up themselves.

    Since I could keep up with politics and understand it (back during the second Clinton Admin) there hasn't been a time when there wasn't a President waving troops off to war. Clinton had a lot of "minor" ones, which add up (like Kosovo and Somalia); Bush heralded in the wars of Iraq and Afghanistan; and Obama, mixing us up in the "Arab Spring", where we now have had troops involved in Libya, next probably Syria, or Yemen. Who is profiting? I'm damn sure not. Are any of you?


    The problem isn't so much the scandal. I think most people are pragmatic enough to get the idea that when you spend a lot of money you're bound to have a bit of corruption. The issue is the spending and the fact that this Administration despite these past mistakes will neither own up to them that they are in fact mistakes but are even proposing a new round of spending.

    The solution? Spend less or at least clearly define what the role of government should be. The problem is that you have people here who get all defensive about government spending pointing at the potential cuts to teachers and the cops as a diversion to spend more money here on this fluff. Government should not be playing venture capitalist.

    As for Haliburton - you will find that Cheney has not benefited since leaving his position there. In fact if you even look at the chart of the company it's unclear that even shareholders have benefited there. That's not true for the pay to play scandals like they're looking like with the billions being spent on solar and I suspect that's just the beginning given how large the spending programs have been for "stimulus".

    I think it is the action, not just the failure to admit it. Seems clear the warnings went up to Obama, who sided with Secy Chu to ignore them. The political connections associated with the loan will not be ignored either.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Oct 01, 2011 2:02 PM GMT
    Hey - it's just taxpayer money.

    "Energy Department approves $4.7 billion in solar loan guarantees"

    http://thehill.com/blogs/e2-wire/677-e2-wire/184909-energy-department-approves-47-billion-in-solar-loan-guarantees

    The Energy Department finalized Friday more than $4.7 billion in loan guarantees for four solar projects, bringing an embattled stimulus-law program aimed at financing renewable energy projects to a close.

    The approvals come amid objections from House Republicans, who have alleged that the department was rushing to finalize the loan guarantees before the program expired Friday.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Oct 01, 2011 3:42 PM GMT
    Riddler, you are one of the most clueless people I have met, that is interested in politics, when it comes to American politicians and politics.

    Dick Cheney isn't profitting? Wow...you really are blind.


    riddler78 said
    ConfederateGhost saidI'm all for investigating our government. I do not believe they have been forthcoming or completely honest with the American People. I don't care what letter they carry after their name, (D) or (R).

    If we are going to go after the Obama Admin. for this...you better damn well believe we better go after the Bush Admin. as well. Dick Cheney deserves to be behind bars for ransacking our nation for his personal gains. You wanna talk about body count? Haliburton racks some pretty sweet numbers up themselves.

    Since I could keep up with politics and understand it (back during the second Clinton Admin) there hasn't been a time when there wasn't a President waving troops off to war. Clinton had a lot of "minor" ones, which add up (like Kosovo and Somalia); Bush heralded in the wars of Iraq and Afghanistan; and Obama, mixing us up in the "Arab Spring", where we now have had troops involved in Libya, next probably Syria, or Yemen. Who is profiting? I'm damn sure not. Are any of you?


    The problem isn't so much the scandal. I think most people are pragmatic enough to get the idea that when you spend a lot of money you're bound to have a bit of corruption. The issue is the spending and the fact that this Administration despite these past mistakes will neither own up to them that they are in fact mistakes but are even proposing a new round of spending.

    The solution? Spend less or at least clearly define what the role of government should be. The problem is that you have people here who get all defensive about government spending pointing at the potential cuts to teachers and the cops as a diversion to spend more money here on this fluff. Government should not be playing venture capitalist.

    As for Haliburton - you will find that Cheney has not benefited since leaving his position there. In fact if you even look at the chart of the company it's unclear that even shareholders have benefited there. That's not true for the pay to play scandals like they're looking like with the billions being spent on solar and I suspect that's just the beginning given how large the spending programs have been for "stimulus".
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Oct 01, 2011 3:49 PM GMT
    ConfederateGhost saidRiddler, you are one of the most clueless people I have met, that is interested in politics, when it comes to American politicians and politics.

    Dick Cheney isn't profitting? Wow...you really are blind.


    Said the pot to what he thought was the kettle. Sorry, but I have to ask, do facts matter to you? At least glasses help to remedy my "blindness", what do you use precisely for that stupidity?

    http://www.factcheck.org/kerry_ad_falsely_accuses_cheney_on_halliburton.html
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Oct 01, 2011 4:07 PM GMT
    Wow...it just keeps getting better with you Riddler.

    "The ad claims Cheney got $2 million from Halliburton "as vice president," which is false. Actually, nearly $1.6 million of that was paid before Cheney took office. More importantly, all of it was earned before he was a candidate, when he was the company's chief executive."

    And yet somehow Halliburton won the contracts for the wars? Yeah...that was nothing special for Cheney involved for that...heh heh *wink* *wink*

    Conflict of Interest? But who cares, right?

    Kind of like in Florida, with Gov Rick Scott. Trying to force welfare recipients to take drug tests and guess who owns the drug testing company the state will be using...his wife.

    But that's just "economic freedom" right Riddler?

    Dude...you are worse than communists with ideas that look good on paper but fail in practice. You don't live here - you don't understand what goes on here, and you don't understand what isn't on paper...but that's all you need for "fact" isn't it, Riddler? Just as long as it is on paper it must be truth.

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Oct 01, 2011 4:13 PM GMT
    ConfederateGhost saidWow...it just keeps getting better with you Riddler.

    "The ad claims Cheney got $2 million from Halliburton "as vice president," which is false. Actually, nearly $1.6 million of that was paid before Cheney took office. More importantly, all of it was earned before he was a candidate, when he was the company's chief executive."

    And yet somehow Halliburton won the contracts for the wars? Yeah...that was nothing special for Cheney involved for that...heh heh *wink* *wink*

    Conflict of Interest? But who cares, right?

    Kind of like in Florida, with Gov Rick Scott. Trying to force welfare recipients to take drug tests and guess who owns the drug testing company the state will be using...his wife.

    But that's just "economic freedom" right Riddler?

    Dude...you are worse than communists with ideas that look good on paper but fail in practice. You don't live here - you don't understand what goes on here, and you don't understand what isn't on paper...but that's all you need for "fact" isn't it, Riddler? Just as long as it is on paper it must be truth.


    Keep grasping at straws. His income was consistent and commensurate with his position at Halliburton. Going (back) into government was obviously a significant step down financial for Cheney.

    As for economic freedom - you really have no clue do you that I don't defend crony capitalism which is not capitalism or markets - but you don't really understand either do you? Pity.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Oct 01, 2011 4:19 PM GMT
    Oh yeah Riddler just for you.

    www.halliburtonwatch.org/about_hal/chronology.html

    www.cbsnews.com/stories/2003/09/26/politics/main575356.shtml

    www.commondreams.org/views03/0403-10.htm

    And that's just the tip of the ice where Halliburton is involved.

    Let's talk about all the nations they've ransacked, murdered innocent people, and let's not forget rape/sexual assault charges.

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Oct 01, 2011 4:33 PM GMT
    riddler - I would completely ignore discussion about "they all do it, so ignore what this administration has done." The previous administration paid the price and their party lost. Same thing will happen now.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Oct 01, 2011 4:39 PM GMT
    Maybe he should just avoid discussing American Politics altogether? It's one thing if you are trying to be a scholar sharing unbiased, truth-based information - it's another when you just spit out article after article but have no real experience in what you are talking about, or have shown no real experience.

    By the way Socal...where in this thread has anyone suggested we ignore the corruption taking place in the current Admin?

    socalfitness saidriddler - I would completely ignore discussion about "they all do it, so ignore what this administration has done." The previous administration paid the price and their party lost. Same thing will happen now.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Oct 01, 2011 4:47 PM GMT
    ConfederateGhost saidOh yeah Riddler just for you.

    www.halliburtonwatch.org/about_hal/chronology.html

    www.cbsnews.com/stories/2003/09/26/politics/main575356.shtml

    www.commondreams.org/views03/0403-10.htm

    And that's just the tip of the ice where Halliburton is involved.

    Let's talk about all the nations they've ransacked, murdered innocent people, and let's not forget rape/sexual assault charges.


    Oh yeah Confederate, just for you - http://www.factcheck.org/kerry_ad_falsely_accuses_cheney_on_halliburton.html

    The factcheck.org article which is supposedly non-partisan - if you had bothered to read it, would have alleviated your concerns about his ongoing ties of which there were none. If only you'd bother to familiarize yourself with the facts, you might say such blatantly foolish things on which you claim more knowledge - but we can all dare to dream?
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Oct 01, 2011 4:49 PM GMT
    ConfederateGhost saidMaybe he should just avoid discussing American Politics altogether? It's one thing if you are trying to be a scholar sharing unbiased, truth-based information - it's another when you just spit out article after article but have no real experience in what you are talking about, or have shown no real experience.

    By the way Socal...where in this thread has anyone suggested we ignore the corruption taking place in the current Admin?

    socalfitness saidriddler - I would completely ignore discussion about "they all do it, so ignore what this administration has done." The previous administration paid the price and their party lost. Same thing will happen now.

    To comment on both your points:
    1) riddler has business interests in the US and has more of a vested interest here than most US citizens. He posts links to articles for the same reason that I do, specifically the authors have taken the trouble of writing an article, and generally their credentials are known better that ours, who post anonymously on a web site.

    2) Bringing up the past when discussing the current scandals is an obvious attempt to deflect attention and suggest it shouldn't be taken seriously. It's a discussion not worth having. The base will support Obama regardless. Nearly all conservatives and most moderates won't. The remaining moderates who can be swayed will not care about discussions of Haliburton.