Casting doubt on the validity of a priest is a sin, likely mortal. If you're worried, don't go to his mass. You can admit personal doubts to your loved ones.  But only as your doubts. You cannot advertise as if you're judge and jury of a circuмstance way beyond your information or control. Don't even include even a potential calumny. You don't know anything about all the circuмstances or details of any particular priest, let alone his internal forum. This kind of division is tearing the Church apart and innocent priests and laity are suffering. If Mary had warned the laity about Judas, you'd have cause. She didn't.     

Casting doubt on the validity of a priest is a sin, likely mortal. If you're worried, don't go to his mass. You can admit personal doubts to your loved ones.  But only as your doubts. You cannot advertise as if you're judge and jury of a circuмstance way beyond your information or control. Don't even include even a potential calumny. You don't know anything about all the circuмstances or details of any particular priest, let alone his internal forum. This kind of division is tearing the Church apart and innocent priests and laity are suffering. If Mary had warned the laity about Judas, you'd have cause. She didn't.     

Judas was a valid bishop. He has nothing to do with this question. There is no doubt about his validity.

It is not a sin to say a priest is doubtfully ordained and therefore we should not go to his Mass. Telling the truth is not sinful. For example if I say that Fr. Pfeiffer is very doubtfully a bishop and therefore men ordained by him are most likely not priests but laymen dressing as priests that is not a sin. And the young fellows he ordains are guilty of asking orders from him. Anyone receiving the sacraments from them is foolish. It is silly to go to confession to a man who is not certainly a priest. Because if he is not a priest I remain in my sins. And it if it not certain that he is a priest I don't know my state. Am I still in my sins or were they absolved? I don't know. That is why we must tell men who we don't know if they are priests or not to get conditionally ordained by a certainly valid bishop.

You're no cleric, aside from members of your own family, you have no authority over anyone and facts or not, you should not speak as if you have an authority that you do not have.

Because you have no authority, you turn it into a personal matter. IOW, the retort to your claim is: who do you think you are?  

Is Bishop Tissier not an authority?  Bishop Dolan?  Fr Cekada?  You may not like these clerics, but they put in the time to research the issues.

No one can deny that the new rites are changed.  Not even you.  So what does this change mean?  It means that validity is doubtful.  You can't argue it.

Canon Law (which is an authority) has rules on how to treat doubtful sacraments.  You can either choose to follow canon law or not.  This isn't a new issue.

I said YOU do not have the authority to say this, I never said +Tissier didn't. Stay the course man! Did +Tissier create a website, name it "Fake Priests" with a picture of a demon priest as the headliner? Does it even sound like something he would do? Of course not and neither should you!