Skip to content

Solargate: $570 million in stimulus money went to two companies with ‘junk’ bond ratings

April 1, 2012

  The Solargate scandal continues to grow; as if the list of failed companies which received stimulus money wasn’t long enough we can now add two more dubious loan guarantees to the mix. The first company is named SoloPower and this company had a ‘dire’ rating by S&P before the Obama regime and Steven Chu authorized a loan guarantee of $170 million; the second company is Abound Solar and at ‘junk credit’ this company’s rating was better than SoloPower’s so they received more stimulus money–$400 million to be exact.

A company called Solopower was cited in a “dire” warning by S&P, which  accurately forecast that the firm would “fail to meet its debt obligations.” Nonetheless, it received $170 million in federal funding guarantees,  investigators told The Daily Caller.

Another company, Abound Solar, was approved for a $400 million loan guarantee  by Obama officials, investigators said. Fitch Ratings, however, had earlier  assigned a “junk credit” rating to Abound. Fitch deemed the firm “highly  speculative” and “lagging in technology” behind its competitors

    One company was predicted to fail and the other was lagging behind in technology (in a field where the technology is lagging behind in general it is even more dubious that this company was lagging behind the poor standards set by other green energy companies) and yet the Obama regime decided to grant these two companies money, and Steven Chu still defends the decision even in light of the fact that taxpayer money was thrown out the window and will probably never be recovered.

    And just for the record; the article linked to above points out that both SoloPower and Abound Solar had worse credit ratings than Solyndra and we know how well that loan guarantee went. Of course, it’s only taxpayer money so why should Barack Obama or Steven Chu care:

The markets were expressing a sense of caution on these firms,” Jeffrey Solsby,  a senior aide to Issa, told TheDC. “The administration did not have this same  sense of caution

  But the news get worse for the Obama regime because federal investigators have stated:

Federal investigators told TheDC that an audit of these loans and loan  guarantees indicated that the administration “ignored” clear warning signs  of a “likely loss” of taxpayer dollars. Investigators also said the  administration exercised “improper influence” in the approval of loan guarantees  to favored companies “through manipulation of analysis — defrauding taxpayers  and misappropriating assets.”

Even more damning allegations, which suggest that former Obama administration  officials and campaign bundlers received a sizable share of those federal funds,  are now surfacing.

  Ignoring warning signs, using improper influence, and manipulating data, all tools the Obama regime used to push its fraudulent green energy initiative. And let us not forget the allegations that campaign bundlers were taking in millions of dollars in the process in what might be the most egregious example of crony capitalism in the history of the United States.

17 Comments leave one →
  1. Conservatives on Fire's avatar
    April 1, 2012 11:32 am

    Every time I am convinced that this pile of shit can’t get any higher, Obama proves me wrong.

    Like

    • Steve Dennis's avatar
      April 1, 2012 7:58 pm

      You underestimate our dear leader. 🙂 This is only the tip of the iceburg, who knows what still lies hidden underneath the surface.

      Like

  2. William McCullough's avatar
    April 1, 2012 1:41 pm

    Obama ignorant of either micro or macro economics could care less about the negative results of his ideologically driven version of economics. After all its not his money and whether his initiatives fail or not, either result will confirm his ideological conviction that capitalism is the root cause of all economic failure…..WM

    Like

    • Steve Dennis's avatar
      April 1, 2012 8:00 pm

      So true William, what does Obama care if he loses our money because after all it isn’t his. This is not about stimulating the economy and it never has been, this is about stimulating his agenda and his ideology and in the end he just doesn’t care how much it costs us for him to push his agenda.

      Like

  3. TexasFred's avatar
    April 1, 2012 3:18 pm

    Obama and Company; the eptiome of corruption…

    Like

  4. .rjjrdq's avatar
    April 1, 2012 3:51 pm

    Yet Obama is out there campaigning that we need even more of the same. There are several candidates ostensibly looking to unseat him in November. How can he get away with this?

    Like

    • Steve Dennis's avatar
      April 1, 2012 8:02 pm

      Remember the way the Democrats ran against Bush in 2004 by claiming he wanted more of the same falied policies? Now Obama is doubling down on the same failed policies and nobody seems to be talking about this.

      Like

  5. bunkerville's avatar
    bunkerville permalink
    April 1, 2012 5:59 pm

    If for no other reason than to set aside our angst about voting for Romney probably, will be the ability to continue bringing these felons it to its rightful conclusion.We get a ne AG and let the fun begin. Get the Senate, and we can have a swell time there as well. Sad, but maybe that will be our best pitch.

    Like

    • Steve Dennis's avatar
      April 1, 2012 8:04 pm

      That’s a good point, if the Democrats regain control of the Senate we can forget about ever bringing these criminals to justice.

      Like

      • bunkerville's avatar
        bunkerville permalink
        April 1, 2012 8:07 pm

        I wonder if we would need a super majority?

        Like

      • Steve Dennis's avatar
        April 1, 2012 8:14 pm

        I think in a case of impeachment it would only take a simple majority but I am not sure.

        Like

  6. Peter McCullough's avatar
    Peter McCullough permalink
    April 1, 2012 6:36 pm

    Those $570 million Barry Bucks could have went towards mortgage and car payments for his peeps who voted for him in 2008.

    Like

    • Steve Dennis's avatar
      April 1, 2012 8:05 pm

      Most likely quite a bit of this money made its way back into the campaign coffers of vulnerable Democrats.

      Like

  7. Peter McCullough's avatar
    Peter McCullough permalink
    April 1, 2012 9:43 pm

    of course. If Solydra and et al weren’t money laundering schemes then Rica A Roni is no longer the San Francisco treat.

    Like

Trackbacks

  1. Teeing it up: A Round at the LINKs (Mob Rule edition) | SENTRY JOURNAL

Leave a reply to .rjjrdq Cancel reply