Here is a website with tons of videos etc., dedicated to "exposing" Fred and his brother Bob - by one who should know....

Why I Quit MhFM: by Jeremy Austin

No Father could love or be more proud of a son than I am of Jeremy.

In 2011, at the age of 22, Jeremy converted to the Dimond Brother’s unique form of Sedevacantism and separated himself from his family and friends; abandoning / rejecting any and all that refused to submit and conform to the ridged traditional Roman Catholic theological end-times dictates imposed by the MhFM.

Yet, to his credit, during his long 7 year journey through the muddled schismatic swap of Sedevacantism he continued his search for the truth which, thank God, eventually led him to the conclusion that the Dimond’s “road to salvation” was actually a “dead end street”. And, with that realization, Jeremy “Quit” the MhFM, and explains the reasons for that break on his website and in a YouTube video that you may wish to access. He wrote:

    "I was there, behind the scenes of the channel VaticanCatholique. There are things you really need to learn about the monks of MHFM..."
    http://www.la-foi.fr/mhfm/en/index.aspx.

We all know about that.

I didn't ask what others say about them - I asked, "what you think are the ACTUAL errors they have Do, you have anything substantial to accuse them of that the theology can back up ? "

Yeah, Stubborn is dishonest.  He actually agrees with most of what they say about EENS, but hates them for being SVs.

I do have some disagreements with them, which I can detail here at some point.  No, I don't shill for them, as Matthew alleged, in yet another misdirectly by way of false ad hominem.  If I could find some of the e-mails they sent me a couple years ago excoriating me, people would realize it's not true.

But I get bashed on all sides, since I don't blindly follow any group, any camp, any "position", nothing.  I am entirely eclectic and make up my mind seeking only the truth.  So I'll agree and disagree with oh, 100% of all Trad clergy, agree about some things, disagree about others.  So I'll agree with SVs on a lot of things, at which time they're my "best friends" here, but then disagree with them ... at which point I'm attacked for being an R&R-defending shill, and of course vice versa.

I honestly really don't care about what any Trad group or Trad leader say about any particular subject.  I have great respect for Bishop Williamson, spent many hours cleaning up his old class lectures and posting them online, since I consider them invaluable, masterpieces in Catholic education ... but then don't ask me about what I think of his views on Novus Ordo miracles, the New Mass, Garabandal, Valtorta, or EENS.  Oh, you disagree with him on Novus Ordo miracles ... you must be "True Resistance", a Hewkonian.  Well, no ... I disagree with about a dozen things they say, while agreeing with a dozen others.  I disagree with the ENTIRE Resistance, True or False, about their views on SVism ... except for with Father Chazal (with whose ecclesiology I can find no fault), or with Father Ringrose, but, well, I don't know ... maybe he's know ex-Fake-or-ex-True-Resistance.  Who knows?  And, quite frankly, I don't care.

I think that a lot of Resistance views are wrong, but that doesn't stop me from helping Father Onuorah raise funds and sending him Mass intentions.

I can go on and on, but I simply don't accept lables, groups, camps, positions ... nor will I "circle the wagons" to defend my little sub-sect of Traditionalism.  I look at one issue and one problem at a time, and send my intellect off in pursuit of the actual truth, caring nothing for what others believe, only about their arguments and reasons for why they believe it and whether they're sound or not sound.

Yeah, Stubborn is dishonest.  He actually agrees with most of what they say about EENS, but hates them for being SVs.

No, I do not hate them - nor do I hate anyone, not even you. What I do hate BECAUSE I believe it is a grave error, is that they scandalize with their sedeism many of those struggling in this crisis with invincible ignorance about our holy religion who listen to them and are easily hooked and reeled in, and even many of those who should know better get hooked, like yourself for example.

Fred and Bob exemplify the reason, and far as I'm concerned, are the poster child as to why traditionally, laymen were not allowed to preach on theological subjects. 
   

OK.

Maybe here is something we can work with...

What is this "grave error and scandal" you are referring to - put some teeth to your assertion please, by citing the doctrinal and/or moral errors they hold - and produce magisterial sources to back up your assertion.

"...Furthermore, we declare, we proclaim, we define that it is absolutely necessary for salvation that every human creature be subject to the Roman Pontiff." - Unam Sanctam, Pope Boniface VIII - 1302 

Note that it does not say: "Furthermore, we declare, we proclaim, we define that it is absolutely necessary for salvation that every human creature be subject to the Roman Pontiff unless you do not believe he is the Roman Pontiff."

I suppose Essenes, Pharisees, Sadducees, Herodians, etc. all said the same...