House Republicans accepted a Democratic demand Friday to include in the public record two versions of a six-page Energy Department legal memo explaining why it restructured the terms of Solyndra's loan guarantee.

The GOP agreed to the unanimous consent request after specifying that there are two versions of the February 2011 document: One is from the DOE general counsel to Susan Richardson, the chief counsel in the loan program office, and the other is from the DOE general counsel to Energy Secretary Steven Chu.

Moments after the panel reached its agreement, POLITICO obtained the version of the DOE memo from Richardson.

House Democrats caught Republicans off guard with the request during an Energy and Commerce Oversight and Investigations Subcommittee hearing called to determine whether DOE had heeded the Treasury Department's warnings when it restructured Solyndra's $535 million loan guarantee in February 2011.

Early on in the hearing, Subcommittee ranking member Diana DeGette (D-Colo.) and other Democrats pressed Republicans to make public the internal legal document that they said undermined the Republicans' argument that the Energy Department violated the Energy Policy Act of 2005 when it allowed private investors to jump ahead of taxpayers to get first dibs on about $75 million if the solar company went belly up.

"This investigation is beginning to resemble a kangaroo court," said Energy and Commerce ranking member Henry Waxman (D-Calif.). "This is a document that the Republicans have had for months."

Republicans initially objected to DeGette's request to release the DOE memo. But they changed their tune after a brief adjournment of the hearing while members went to the floor for votes.

"It reminds me of a serial when you were a kid going to the movie," Waxman said.

Upon their return, Republican panel leaders made it clear they'd agree to put the two documents into the record. But underscoring the political food fight that the Solyndra investigation has become, panel members still got twisted into a series of testy partisan exchanges over the subtle differences between the two versions of the DOE memo.

Rep. Lee Terry (R-Neb.) questioned why Chu's name wasn't on one of the documents. "It looks like there's a cover up to protect Dr. Chu," he said.

DeGette snapped back, "The allegations of a cover up are exactly the problem with this investigation."

"I've never seen such a big fuss over such a small thing in all my time in the committee," said Rep. John Dingell (D-Mich.), the House dean and a former Energy and Commerce chairman.

Republican investigators said they planned to bring Richardson and several of her colleagues at DOE, from the loan guarantee program and the general counsel's office, in for interviews and potentially as hearing witnesses.

In making their case for the Republicans to release the memos, Democrats claimed that Republicans had long been sitting on the materials - Waxman noted that Rep. Phil Gingrey (R-Ga.) even quoted from it in a mid-September hearing. Waxman also slammed Republicans for resisting the request when they'd already leaked to the press several internal emails associated with the Solyndra investigation.

"The release doesn't taint the investigation any more than the release of these other documents," Waxman said.

Supercommittee deal iffy, says Chris Van Hollen 

Rep. Chris Van Hollen still has his fingers crossed that the deficit-cutting supercommittee can strike a deal by the Nov. 23 deadline.

But Democratic congressman from Maryland - one of the powerful panel's dozen members - also struck a realistic tone in a speech Friday, saying he's not sure the special panel will ultimately resolve their differences.

"I'm absolutely convinced that all 12 members are working hard to try to reach an agreement for the good of the country," Van Hollen said at a forum sponsored by National Journal and the Atlantic. "Whether we're able to overcome some of the obstacles by the end of the day, it's still unclear."

Van Hollen's remarks illustrate the tough task facing the supercommittee as deficit-slashing recommendations from around Capitol Hill hit the panel and its members face a steadily dwindling time line.

The stakes are high. If the supercommittee doesn't find at least $1.2 trillion in deficit-reduction measures, defense and domestic programs will face across-the-board cuts. And the time is short. Van Hollen reiterated on Friday that the panel would realistically have to submit their plan by the "very beginning" of November to get it scored by the Congressional Budget Office.

All this comes as the public's approval of Congress remains in the tank, making it more urgent for the supercommittee to be able to reach an agreement and stave off a partisan stalemate, he said.

"It's incumbent upon Congress to do what it can to bridge the differences for the common good," said Van Hollen, one of the three House Democrats on the panel. "And I hope the joint committee can be part of changing those perceptions."

Though congressional leaders are still cheering for success, there's also a bit of skepticism on Capitol Hill on whether the panel will ultimately forge a deal.

Rep. Maxine Waters (D-Calif.) introduced a bill late Thursday that would dismantle the supercommittee. And Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) has vowed to be among the "first on the floor" to propose legislation that would halt the automatic cuts to defense that would occur if the panel failed to reach a deal.

"It's something we passed," said McCain, the top Republican on the Senate Armed Services Committee. "We can reverse it."