The investigation began mid-Feb 2011 & ended aprox a year later.

The sites I (more or less by chance) produced report on the ongoing investigation at (then) real time.

Like F&F the Obama admin stonewalled it’s way through to a non-conclusive official result.

If you cannot distinguish between the political inability to (what?) a sitting president & the fact that Solyndra was as I described in my #11, then like I said….IMO, duped or blind partisan.

I’ll take an inadvertant “webb” over a purposeful “successful”.

Please explain how Solyndra was “successful”. Maybe Santa can bring me an applicable spell-checker. What’s on your list?

Your second link is nit-picking but debatable. However the fact remains that “The loan comprises just 1.3% of DOE’s overall loan portfolio.” But far be it from me to question “a Fellow at the Adam Smith Institute in London, a writer here and there on this and that and strangely, one of the global experts on the metal scandium, one of the rare earths.“!

Your third link is also bemoaning all the bad to be found before the investigation was finished…and did not find that “bad”. “After over a year of investigations, many thousands of pages of documents, testimony from dozens of people, a half-dozen hearing, there’s … nothing.”
http://grist.org/politics/house-republican-accidentally-tells-truth-about-solyndra-investigation/

“What are the results of this expansive (and no doubt expensive) investigation?
Bupkis. Nothing.”
http://grist.org/politics/one-year-in-gop-solyndra-investigation-remains-a-gigantic-nothingburger/

“After spending the last year investigating the scandal-free DOE Loan Guarantee Program, House Republicans have thrown in the towel.”
http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2012/03/30/455853/after-failed-solyndra-investigation-gop-leaders-want-an-even-more-absurd-investigation-of-clean-energy-grants/

Who’s “webb”?

Again from my link above: “ Matt Rogers, the Obama administration official who took over the loan program, says he never felt an iota of political pressure to approve Solyndra. Republicans later subpoenaed 300,000 pages of administration documents, and they never found any evidence of politics behind the decision to award the loan.
Solyndra built its factory on time and on budget, which helped reduce the cost of its panels. Its revenues soared, as it attracted customers like Frito-Lay.
But silicon got unexpectedly cheap, so Solyndra’s financials evoked the old joke about losing money on every sale and trying to make it up on volume. The company also made some strategic mistakes and ran out of cash before a new management team could turn things around. Eventually, the Energy Department withdrew its lifeline.”
Read more: http://www.nydailynews.com/opinion/quit-outrage-solyndra-article-1.1154467#ixzz2EVEnTnOF

“​Solyndra has received a vast amount of media attention since the beginning of September, but very few outlets have conveyed the real story – that the fossil fuel industry receives billions of dollars in government subsidies on an annual basis, and leaves solar and other renewables manufacturers far and away in the dust.

According to a March 2011 story by the Christian Science Monitor, gas and oil interests receive a steep $41 billion per year in subsidies. Also, according to a July 2010 article in the New York Times​, the fossil fuel industry at-large benefits from tens of billions of dollars in government subsidies on an annual basis.”
Desmogblog (http://s.tt/19Bkv)

Obama and government haters have blown this Solyndra mistake (and others) out of all proportion for bitter political reasons that have nothing to do with sound arguments and everything to do with hate and division. Even a simple mind should be able to see millions for new energy measured against billions for already profitable energy is the real problem. But it is so much easier to screech “Solyndra” while pointing a finger.

http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/obama-administration-solyndra/story?id=13640783

http://www.forbes.com/sites/timworstall/2011/09/17/solyndra-yes-it-was-possible-to-see-this-failure-coming/

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-09-12/obama-team-backed-535-million-solyndra-aid-as-auditor-warned-on-finances.html

Many more.

As to; “Despite what you consider my being “duped” over, Solyndra was a successful idea and many backers who believed in it, in two different administrations.”

Great differences in degree. As to “successful idea” how do you define failure?

…of course, unlike private investors, Uncle plays with taxpayer dollars.

Which is the reason centrally managed economies inevitably fail. There is no way the national government can possibly know the value that individuals place on specific products or services. Even attempting to influence that with taxpayer money ultimately falls, and Solyndra is a prime example.

While I appreciate what I am certain is your genuine concern Jim Lucas, it is not me that has been “duped” on Solyndra that I can tell. My “POV here is strictly” from research of several sources in addition to the one listed above from Forbes:

Quit the outrage over Solyndra
Massive Obama scandal? There’s no there there

Pennies to Clean Energy, Billions to Big Oil — Mainstream Media Missing the Real Story on Solyndra

“It is no wonder then, that handed a loan that was pennies by comparison to what the fossil fuel industry receives in subsidies and tax breaks on an annual basis from the government, Solyndra was bound to fail. The Chinese government, for one, recently handed $20 billion to solar panel corporations.”

Solyndra’s collapse is a tale of too much dazzle
Investors were convinced that the solar company was the harbinger of an alternative-energy boom. But the market changed too swiftly.

“Solyndra appeared to be well-positioned to compete and succeed in the global marketplace,” said LaVera, whose agency ultimately turned Solyndra down for a second loan guarantee, worth $469 million.

He noted that revenue increased 40% from 2009, to $140 million last year, but acknowledged that the growth was far below prior company projections. “The reason they went bankrupt is the changes in the solar market.”

Despite what you consider my being “duped” over, Solyndra was a successful idea and many backers who believed in it, in two different administrations. You can believe it was only some sort of political favor as you like. It is well known that the “green companies” are going to be friends to Dems who support this American solution to an American problem. And I hope we continue to pursue the ideals of energy alternatives.

You have no idea how much I restrain myself.

Gee, ya think?

Also political patronism as to the “greenies”, photo-op, etc.

In addition the laws in place were circumvented to leave the tax-payer holding the bag.

IMO, you’re POV here is strictly partisan.

At least, although more for political gain than research, we have the federal grants, loan guarantees, incentives and abatement on the record and the results verified. The state and local largess has no such accountability, which is what this thread is actually about.

Do you EVER miss an opportunity to decry the federal government? Did you think the Rural Electrification Administration was a waste of taxpayer money?