That is not the message I get from the reading the piece. It reads to me like the author is comparing the words or Burke to those of Lefebvre and pointing out the inconsistency in their actions. He is not saying Cardinal Burke is the "new Lefebvre", that would be stupid and an obvious lie, but rather stating that Burke is saying much the same as Lefebvre said but failing to connect the dots and recognise that his historical criticism of the SSPX, now make no sense in light of his comments about Francis being almost indentical to Arch. Lefebvre's comments about JP2, 33 years before.