That is not capitalism, but corporatism (which is the politically correct modern name for fascism).
No, "corporatism" was Mussolini's preferred phrase, over that of "fascism." It is not "fascism" by any stretch of the imagination for a company to get a loan from the government.
Since there was another option, although less palatable to Musk, he should not have received a federal bailout.
And subjected himself to the whims of the corporations that gave him money? I'm sure they totally wouldn't interfere with the way the company operated, they'd never start demanding ridiculous growth at the cost of product quality and customer service, not at all.
unlike the GM bailout, this bailout was to somebody in the 1% group to enable him to make luxury automobiles for others in the 1%.
At worst there is no difference. At best, it prevented an actually innovative company from sinking and its technology dispersing into the market, never to be heard from again while GM et. al. continued doing what they were doing.
Yes, Mussolini preferred the term corporatism, over fascism, but corporatism, today, is the acceptable term because of fascism has ties to Hitler and Mussolini.
It doesn't matter if if Google or anybody else would have changed Tesla, that is not the point. As an investor in the company, they have every right to do so, up to the point of their percentage ownership. That's how corporations work, after all. The government had no need to bail out Tesla as there was private financing available, unless you want to argue, they wanted to further Musk's vision for Tesla. However, that brings us back to corporatism/fascism.
Finally, even if Tesla had a bunch of good, even innovative ideas, that doesn't make them an innovative company if they can't bring product to market. There are a lot of entrepreneurs that have good and innovative ideas, but unless you can deliver, they are simply dreams. Musk delivered, because the government made him a below market loan, that came from the taxpayers.
It sounds like you are arguing that government should fund billionaires companies because it might produce innovation. Historically, billionaires became billionaires because they took on the risk of promoting their vision, not the taxpayer, but maybe this is the New America, where government is needed to even run our companies.