CathInfo.com

I'd be happy to donate $, but in this day and age, ordinations must be proved, especially when they occur outside of a formal seminary.  This is not an attack on the bishop or the seminarian - it is a matter of both justice and church law.  Justice, because the laity has a right to know who's a priest and who isn't.  Church law, because the church is a VISIBLE organization, whose members are VISIBLE and so are its priests.  You can't get ordained in secret.  And even if it wasn't secret, if it happened irregularly (i.e. outside a seminary) then that's not exactly public, which I would say is a requirement, on some level...especially in our crazy days.

Nobody realizes that its uncanonical to reveal in  public, affairs of the internal forum of seminary life, as OLMC has done. Its up to them to deny anything untrue publicly said about them, but not reveal things about seminarians.

.
You are a piece of work, or at least the script you've been given is!
.
You're not using the expression "internal forum" correctly.  "Internal forum" isn't a synonym for "what happens behind closed [seminary] doors."
.
And whatever the matter, there's nothing "uncanonical" about revealing... whatever it is you think they've revealed about their seminary life, mainly because their seminary isn't canonical in the first place!  But also because there aren't canonical laws about that type of thing anyways.

.
Do you/your handler think that it suffices for you to be contra-Pfeiffer and tangentially "pro-resistance?"  That the combination of these facts will overcome the faithful and set aside any legitimate concerns about Francis' fitness for the priesthood and validity of orders?  Interesting strategy, and it unfortunately it may be enough for some to commence kissing hands.  All the more reason for skeptics to rally and demand proofs which shouldn't have to be asked for in the first place.
.
It's not difficult.  Just get a free blog (there are loads out there) and upload all the docuмentation.