I do not need to watch it, for I know it is the same ole dung repeated since 2005, when the SSPX had to deal for the first time with a "pope" that was consecrated a bishop with the new formula, Ratzinger. Before that time you could find many SSPX priests openly teaching people about the doubts in the new ordinations of priests and the consecrations of bishops. After Ratzinger they changed their tune. There's no money in saying their superiors in Rome may not be valid priests when they're kowtowing to them.
In a nutshell, he (sspx) says the new rite of ordination is valid when followed to the letter, but doubtful or invalid if the consecrating bishop does not follow the NO script but instead, 'ad libs' during the ordination. What he said there has always been the position of the SSPX since it's very beginning.
Like so many issues that are still discussed and debated, this is an old issue, it's as old as the NO and was addressed way back when the new rite first came out.
It was addressed +50 years ago during the infancy of the NO, even before the SSPX was founded, precisely because the enemies flooded the Church with effeminate, liberal priests which caused doubt of their validity among most of the truly faithful way back then.
So this particular issue is not anything that was not already addressed pre-1969, before many (most?) people here were even born, or converted, or converted back to the true faith. So he's not saying anything that has not already been said umpteen times over the last 5 decades.