Fox News
Expand
Browse All Video
Watch Live

You're watching...

Energy Secretary to Testify About Solyndra Loan

Details

  • Description

    What questions will be asked at House hearing?

  • Duration 3:44
  • Date

Clips

Also in this playlist...

Editor's Picks

Auto-advance: ON

Auto-advance
View All

Transcript

This transcript is automatically generated

Are they are going right to the top in the cylinder of matter energy secretary Steven Chu will face congress on the 500 million dollar loan.

To the solar company that's now out of business.

The congressman leading that hearing his Republican cliff Stearns I don't know what he's my guest in Washington and good morning.

Do you good -- what is your first question to secretary Q sir.

Well first -- we're glad he's testifying.

November 17 I think it's Thursday the first question I guess we have two major questions bill.

First of law in August 2009.

This staff and the Department of Energy indicated that -- would prophetic they go bankrupt in September 2011 so two years ago they said it would go bankrupt.

And of course we have all these emails so we're curious why secretary she was still pushing this company.

Even after price Waterhouse came in and said that this company can't make it and some of the numbers were bogus -- So we'd like SS secretary -- why he was pushing his company.

So forward when it was obviously could make it.

And obviously the second very important question is that he subordinated taxpayers 535.

Million dollars to two private.

Hedge funds of course one of these hedge funds was owned by one of the investors in cylinder.

And when I talked to the secretary of Treasury's chief financial officer.

Mr.

burner he said over 28 years of experience at the department of treasury he has never never seen a subordination.

At taxpayers' money outside.

Commercial.

Loans so I think the secretary hashed things because -- question you have -- -- very well is this illegal did someone break the law.

I think so the energy policy act of 2005.

Specifically says you cannot subordinate.

Taxpayers so I'm just curious on what legal grounds he and of course.

The legal counsel for the Department of Energy that's gonna have to explain why they did this and and it's just my opinion is they broke the law.

-- it's another obvious question at have you found yet whether or not someone is hiding something.

Well we have found that.

The council.

For the Department of Energy did two memos trying to justify.

Why they subordinated.

We'd like to know -- secretary you read those memos looks like -- -- was not sent to him and it appears that they were set up as a cover for the Department of Energy in the event.

This was question so we'd like to -- -- secretary you know about these two memos he endorsed them.

And was the -- -- -- council for the Department of Energy replaced.

So that they can push this deal through okay now that there's going to be a lot of people watch in this hearing when it gets underway in the seventeenth and November.

Is there -- -- -- for secretary you to explain all this -- Well I think they're gonna say the interpretation.

That one sentence and energy policy act is open to interpretation.

In fact their interpretation I think is totally erroneous.

But I think the American people have a right.

To hear his side as well as the department of energy's counsel who we intend to bring up before -- -- secretary chew up so that.

We hear their point of view under oath and and here's sector -- you wonder describe why he -- or disagree all right.

And and you pointed this out to this report suggests that the investors in the company.

The deal was reworked should be investors get paid back before the taxpayers -- -- that his chief on your list there too.

And then we wonder whether or not there are more examples likes a -- be uncovered in your future.

A we're watching on the seventeenth sir thank you for your time -- -- my bill from Washington.

-- foxnews.com is the email also -- -- at Bill Hemmer this topic has been hot -- only gained more steam.

As we move into the next month -- -- because US if your question on that.

Load More