CathInfo.com

Bishop Da Silva didn’t flunk out of the SAJM seminary. He actually started in a conservative leaning Novus Ordo seminary where he discovered Tradition in his position as the librarian. He studied in Santa Cruz for many years before going to France to study. He also speaks 4 languages including French. Bishop Williamson hand picked Bishop Da Silva to go to France after noticing his qualities of leadership skill. 

Flunking out of the seminary. He was there for more than a year and more than 5 years in Santa Cruz. 

It’s easy to talk like you know when you actually don’t. 

.
It seems that, instead of rushing out to say he doesn't approve because he doesn't know anything about the candidates, he might have learned something about the candidates and *then* issued an opinion.
.

There’s no need to speculate. Speak with SGG yourself and they will more than likely tell you. Their principle concern is that Fr. Altamira and Fr. Roy are what they label suspected opinionists. That means that they did not want these priests consecrated because they would say they are sede vacantists, while saying that faithful could still go to SSPX masses. Opportunists on the other hand, will use this as a weak attempt to smear ex-resistance priests, but the fact is that SGG did not think these priests were dogmatic sedevacantists and that is what led to the division. 

Too sedevacantist for Bishop Faure but not sedevacantist enough for Bishop McGuire. Can’t please anyone can you. 

Seems like, for a cleric, becoming Sedevacantist is a recipe for promotion, a recipe for "greatness". Imagine being consecrated a bishop while still very young, around 30 years old. That totally wouldn't influence a person when choosing between sedevacantism and not-sedevacantism.

Since Fr. Pierre Roy was my parish priest for about 8 years (before and after his departure from the SSPX), I can tell you he did NOT come to his opinions as a "recipe for promotion".  Earlier on, near the 2012 time frame, he hoped the SSPX would come to its senses, and perhaps for Bishop Tissier to help with the restoration.  He was very alone when he left, without prospects for "promotion".  The SSPX had changed, not he.  I think folks on CathInfo would know what I am talking about.

I have been a Traditional Catholic for over 50 years, and met many dozens of priests, many of whom stayed at our home.  Fr. Roy, now I believe in his mid-30's, always had the wisdom, prudence, and charity of a much older priest.  (I've met many newly-minted priests, in their first years, and I always enjoyed their zest but their prudence was still a work in progress.)  What Fr. Roy and we faithful endured together in Canada, with the C0v1d police etc, only confirmed my good opinion of Fr. Roy.  I would say the same for other priests who took actual risks for people's souls during this time.  If what we suffered be "greatness", then it is to be desired.

I do not feel qualified to recommend who should be made a bishop, and when and where, since I am just a layman.  I leave that to God and His clergy.  If there is anything that I can do to help them get together to sort things out, I am more than willing to help.  They are, all of them, in my prayers.