Montini's abrogation of Quo Primum is clear as day, you just refuse to see it.
Haha. He didn't even use the word 'abrogate' yet he did it anyway? Makes a lot of sense.
Answer me these 2 questions, all of you. New Rome wants the sspx and all of tradition to be under their control, right? They know that if they get the sspx to "make a deal" then traditionalism will be supremely damaged and the # of trads will be so few, and unorganized, as to be meaningless. Do we all agree?
If this is the case, then why didn't Benedict say that Quo Primum was abrogated? Why didn't he say it was revised/replaced with the new mass? He could have easily said so, and how could any of us argue? Then he could say the old mass is illicit and that would really push a lot of trade to come to Rome. ...Yet, they haven't said so. Why?
Further, same argument with Vatican 2. New Rome could easily say that it's infallible and must be accepted or else. How many trads would fold under this pressure and join Rome? A lot. Why hasn't Rome said this?
The answer is that they can't say these things because they aren't true.