More shady deals hintedAt a number of points in its troubled history, solar-panel manufacturer Solyndra faced dire financial problems that threatened its survival. Yet at each crisis, Energy Secretary Steven Chu and officials at his agency failed to take steps that critics say could have limited taxpayer losses when the company collapsed this summer.
Instead, Energy Department officials monitoring Solyndra and its $535 million federal loan took extraordinary steps to prop up the company, according to a Washington Post analysis of previously confidential documents.
This is only news to WaPo readers, however.
On Friday, the release of a new round of White House documents added more details, showing concerns among senior advisers earlier this year that Solyndra might erupt into a political scandal requiring the replacement of Chu and his agency team. A former Obama campaign adviser wrote to presidential counselor Pete Rouse in February suggesting that Chu be replaced immediately with a manager who could better direct Energy Department funds. The memo warned of GOP attacks "that are surely coming over Solyndra and other Energy Department deals that have gone to Obama donors and have underperformed."
There are MORE shady deals, Pete?
Energy Department spokesman Damien LaVera said the agency tried to help Solyndra recover so that workers could keep their jobs and taxpayers would be repaid. He said Chu and other officials supported Solyndra based on information provided by the company.
Of course. Now it's about the jobs. But why would you ignore all the worries? Why put the taxpayers in last place for payback?
In July, company executives told House committee members in a letter that "the company just completed a record quarter for shipments, with strong demand in the United States. Last year we shipped 65 megawatts of panel production and expect that to double again this year."
Profits are soooh capitalistic!
Energy Department officials did not dispute these assertions, which echoed those made four months earlier by Solyndra, in an interview with The Post: "We doubled our production from 2009 to 2010. We'll double it again from 2010 to 2011. "
And double our profits. Or losses. Whatever. The Post didn't ask about profitability?
But financial records show that the company was selling its panels at a loss and that its revenue in fall 2009 was substantially the same as in spring 2011. An internal White House memo put it this way: "The company has had 0 percent sales growth since [fall] 2009."
Even better. Doubled production, doubled costs, no more sales revenue. Inventory building. Hmmmm... Does that have an effect on cash flow?
Outsiders watching the saga unfold worried months before Solyndra's collapse that Obama would take a political hit over investing federal money in the company.
In February, outside energy adviser Dan Carol, an Oregon professor who worked on Obama's 2008 presidential campaign, sent a blistering e-mail to senior White House officials, declaring that the Energy Department had suffered a "deployment failure" and urging Obama to "make major leadership changes as soon as possible."
"Secretary Chu is a wonderful and brilliant
Capitalist jobs? Ones that earn money, Professor? Add value to the economy?
Carol predicted that "GOP attacks . . . are surely coming over Solyndra and other inside DOE deals that have gone to Obama donors and have underperformed. No reason to fuel that coming storm, and believe me it will come."
There we go again - "other inside DOE deals". Maybe the Professor should testify. The WaPo article ends here, with a teaser. Maybe they don't get it.