Hasty Generalaizations, vagueness, pure opinion, unsubstantiated “facts”?

 Politics is a dirty business and are there are no pure/perfect souls but, these last two democratic administration set new standards. It was recently reported, and verified, in the 76 days between the election and Trump taking office, the Department of Energy gave out loans of $93,000,000,000. Many did not even include business plans or financial projections.
How can any American (left or right) condone such an arrogant waste of tax dollars while the government builds mountains of debt.
We need to stop believing those who created this boondoggle (bureaucrats/media/many politicals) and thank those who are searching out this “theft”.

Fact checked:

Short answer:
There is no public evidence that the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) approved $93 billion in new loans in the 76-day “lame-duck” period between the November 5 2024 election and the January 20 2025 inauguration. The figure appears to trace back to a May 7 2025 interview on The Glenn Beck Program with incoming Energy Secretary-designate Chris Wright; no supporting documentation has been produced. Official DOE data and independent press coverage show much smaller numbers.

 
What the official record shows
Time period
Source
Value quoted
What it represents
Entire Biden term (Mar 2021 – Jan 17 2025)
DOE Loan Programs Office “Year in Review 2024”
$107.6 billion
Total project investment associated with 53 deals announced in four years (≈ $60.6 B in closed loans + ≈ $46.9 B in still-conditional commitments)
Post-election rush (Nov 5 2024 – late Jan 2025)
Financial Times reporting, Jan 2025
≈ $38 billion
Commitments and closings announced after Election Day, not disbursed money
These two public tallies leave at most about $38 billion, not $93 billion, that can be linked to the 76-day window.

 
Why the $93 billion claim looks shaky
Arithmetic conflict – If $93 B had really been finalized after Nov 5, total Biden-era lending would have exceeded $140 B. DOE’s own year-end statement caps all four years at $107.6 B. The numbers cannot both be true.
No corroborating documents – Neither DOE press releases, Federal Register notices, nor major financial outlets list anywhere near $93 B of new deals in that time frame. The highest-value single package announced after the election was a group of utility grid-modernization conditional guarantees worth ≈ $23 B on Jan 16 2025—large, but still far below $93 B.
Conditional vs. closed – DOE routinely issues conditional commitments months before a deal reaches financial close. Many of the postelection announcements have since been amended, downsized, or (in the case of Sunnova’s $2.9 B guarantee) canceled by the incoming administration .
 
About “no business plans or financial projections”
The Loan Programs Office requires detailed technical, market, and financial models before issuing either a conditional commitment or a final loan guarantee.
A Government Accountability Office audit of the program (GAO-12-157) criticized documentation gaps but still found the review process “as stringent as or more stringent” than private-sector project-finance norms (Government Accountability Office).
No audit or credible news investigation has stated that recent DOE loans went forward without business plans or projections.
 
Bottom line
Claim: DOE gave out $93 B in loans in the 76 days before Trump took office; many lacked business plans.
Verdict: Unsubstantiated. Available government records and mainstream reporting show at most about $38 B in postelection commitments—most still conditional—not $93 B, and standard due-diligence requirements make the “no business plan” allegation highly unlikely.
If new primary documents emerge—such as an internal DOE memo or loan ledger—they could change the picture. Until then, treating the $93 billion figure as fact is not supported by the public record.

The first sentence begins with what seems like a hedge. Saying that no one's hand's are truly clean could be a preemptive defense against someone countering this argument with information about Republican politicians. But the most agregious part is the mention of the last two administrations. This would probably be ad hominem (guilt by association) or package-deal fallacy , as the argument they'll provide for this is something that happened at the end of Biden's term, at which point Obama was out of office for nearly 8 years, so he would have had nothing to do with this.

There is an assertion of fact, that the Department of Energy gave out $93 billion in loans during Biden's last 76 days in office. Which, I don't know whether that number is accurate, but it fails to specify whether these loans were fully created within that 76 day window, or whether the funds had been allocated over a longer timeline and simply dispersed during that time. Or, whether this was a decision made in full by Biden and his DOE, or if those funds had been allocated by Congress with the help of Republicans.

Another instance of this being vague is that "many" is used to describe the number that did not have business plans or financial projection. If $93 billion in loans were allocated, this could be split among an extremely large number of projects, so "many" mean something like 100 out of 100,000 projects. There's also no indication that this is even a requirement. For instance, if money was loaned to homeowners to install solar panels on their roof, there would be no reason for them to have this information.

The main argument seems to be based on a false equivalence . They point out that loans were dispersed, and treat that as equivalent to tax money being given away. This ignores the fact that loans, typically, get paid back with interest, so this isn't the waste of tax money, theft, or large addition to the debt that they claim it is. There's a claim made about lack of transparency, but no specific claim made about misuse of the funds.