False; the Vatican regularlydenies what this guy says in his column.

I want to hear it from the horses mouth, not a disreputable atheist trying to project his own opinions to the pope.

Then why on earth does Francis keep offering interviews to the same guy who has apparently lied and misquoted him dozens of times?

You are obviously deficient in your reading ability.  This should give pause to anyone considering buying your book.

The Vatican regularly says that the quotes are not precise.  The Vatican regularly suggests something is deficient about the quotes.  The Vatican does not dispute that what the man writes is true and Bergoglio has never made any public comment denying the veracity of the statements.

If you heard it from Bergoglio's own mouth, you'd claim that the translation if faulty and we're not taking the cultural understandings of the specific words in proper context.

That’s a very fair and reasonable objection and observation.

All I’m saying is that for something with such immense implications, I want to hear it straight from him.

My question is:

1) If the pope would make a public profession that our Lord was a mere man from the time of the Incarnation until his death, would this suffice for a formal act of apostasy?

2) if so, does this circuмvent the need for the Church to declare his deposition?  

Answer A- It would seem not, since without said declaration, many would not perceive the manifest defection from the faith, and continue to follow authority into apostasy;

Answer B- It would seem so, because if apostasy is manifest, then the following of authority into it would be culpable (manifest means manifest);

Answer C- It would seem not, because even such a reprehensible doctrine is not manifest apostasy, but only implies apostasy (ie., Francis is not declaring he has left the faith, but has embraced a doctrine incompatible with the faith, so his apostasy would be implicit, not manifest).

These are just some of the things I am pondering relative to the news report.

Media wise, it is pretty evident that the "old atheist' ( the term could be applied to Francis as well )is a professional trial balloon floater for Bergoglio.  How many times has this happened before? The Vatican and Francis use this "journalist" as a shield of deniability to float as much heresy as they can get away with, and to gauge  public reaction. if there isn't much, they go ahead with the agenda without scathing Francis. If there is a great outcry, they deny it and retreat for the next neferious anti-Christ moment. I'm totally sick of this manipulation.
I am not a sede but I am seriously considering the Giuffre theory of a living True Pope; banished so that an anti-pope can falsely take the seat and promote apostasy as there is no Grace of the  office for an invalid pope. So- there is a need for a (banished)true Pope so that the invalid anti-pope, not impacted by the Holy Spirit can spread as much destruction as he can. In other words, Francis couldn't exist in his present apsotasy without Benedict, and  the four Vll anti-Popes prior couldn't exist without a living Cardinal Siri.(Pope Gregory XVll)

If Bergoglio were to come out and confirm this heresy, there would be no need for any declaration by the Church.  This is where S&S are wrong.  When it's obvious and blatant like this, there's no need for any formal declaration, since all Catholics would simply recognize that this man is not one of us.  S&S muddied the waters with their shoddy work.

What effect would any declaration have?  Since the Church cannot judge the pope or juridically convict him of anything at all, it would only be a clarification regarding the mind of the Church.  It only serves a purpose where perhaps the Church might be divided and not unanimous, or where there was any disagreement over whether a particular proposition was actually heretical.  Such a declaration would have the effect of the Church "making up her mind" on the matter ... and that's it.  In a case like this, where Bergoglio were to deny the Divinity of Christ, he would be non-Catholic and a non-Pope without any declaration.  S&S falsely drew the line at "apostasy" due to bad theology.