CathInfo.com

4) For this specific purpose (i.e., the transmission of sanctifying grace), if there is a sacrament + well-disposed communicant = grace passes.

You are taking a general principle and applying it to circuмstances which don't make sense.  You are leaving out all kinds of factors, which affect the morality of the situation.
.
A valid baptism gets rid of Original sin, but is it a good and holy baptism if it is done in the middle of a rock concert, while Ozzy Osborne is on state screaming blasphemies?  Of course, this would be an abominable sacrilege and the participants would commit a heinous sin, even if the sacrament were valid. 
.
Going to mass provides grace, but am I allowed to show up to mass in pajamas, half-naked, and approach the communion rail as if nothing is wrong?  Of course, this would be a sacrilegious scandal, even if the communion would "provide grace".
.
A priest has the power to walk into a grocery store, go to the produce section, setup a table, and say mass.  Is "grace conferred"?  Yes and no.  Yes, in the sense that the mass would be valid, but no, in the sense that this act would be highly illegal and immoral because Church Law would forbid it and also such an act would be a sacrilegious and blasphemous use of his priestly abilities, taking no account of the reverence of Mass nor of the glory due to God by a proper church and liturgy. 
.
The circuмstances of an act, even if the act is a sacrament, affect the morality of the act.  This is philosophy 101.
.

Pax has now invented a new invalidity of mass "communion in the hand." Wow. What part of the mass is communion in the hand? If a person receives kneeling and the next person receives standing does Jesus disappear because mass is now invalid?

Many of you are falsely viewing this debate through the lens of validity only.  You are obsessed with this litmus test and ignoring all the other factors.  Even if the new mass could be proven to be 100% valid, every single time, one could still not go.  Because of the illegalities of the liturgy (which make it gravely sinful) and of the overall atmosphere which is anti-Catholic, irreverent and immoral.  Communion-in-the-hand is a sacrilege, because only the priest's consecrated fingers are allowed to touch the Holy Eucharist.  Communion-in-the-hand happens at 98% of every single novus ordo mass across the globe.  Therefore to attend such a liturgy, where this sacrilege occurs on a normal basis, is also a sacrilege because one is not allowed to attend liturgies which allow sin.  You would be openly and publically condoning this practice by your attendance.  This is not to mention all other other, varied sacrileges (talking, dancing, women altar girls, women/men Eucharistic ministers, dogs in the sanctuary, homo/gαy services, immodest attire in the sanctuary, etc, etc).  Validity, while an important question, is the least of the problems with the novus ordo.  If you think you can go to any valid mass, while all the above nonsense takes place, and think God is honored and glorified with such anti-religious and anti-Catholic activities, you just aren't thinking like a catholic.  At all.

“It must be understood immediately that we do not hold to the absurd idea that if the New Mass is valid, we are free to assist at it. The Church has always forbidden the faithful to assist at the Masses of heretics and schismatics even when they are valid. It is clear that no one can assist at sacrilegious Masses or at Masses which endanger our faith.…

Here it is again, Sean.  Read it a few times and let it sink in.  +ABL is not in your corner.