Not everyone lives on the Internet. Ordinary people use this forum less often than the loudest users. The common Catholic I've encountered in the DC area has never even heard of Vigano.

Non-sequitur.

Instead of Vigano saying he made a grave error in actively campaigning for the leader of Operation Warpspeed and the "Father of the (depop) Vaccine" he still says to this day he wants Trump back in power.


After over 40,000 American deaths!

Even Alex Jones has called out Trump for being responsible for those deaths and asked him to stop promoting the shots. 

Trump refuses and still wants more, more, more deaths. Get those shots people.  The vaccine is beautiful!  I'm PROUD of it.  Put them in your children and babies.  More miscarriages, more, more, more!!!

He is a walking death cult.

So Alex Jones has the decency to renounce Trump at this point and no longer support him.

Not Vigano. 

He wants Trump back in power.

Desperate people will excuse anything to hold on to their heroes.

You nailed it. 

How could the Opus dei, ex novus ordo, bishop not discern that Trump is a crypto Jєω?

How could it be that Bp. Williamson has not discerned AB Vigano's errors nor spoken out on zio-Trump too?



 

You keep making stuff up about +Vigano.  He simply said that the Ukraine situation would not be as bad if Trump were in office right now (vs. Biden), and the earlier "lavishing of praise on Trump" was a carefully worded letter trying to appeal to Trump's ego to do what's right, while at the same time using the expression that he "dared hope" Trump would be on the side of good.

+Vigano has been one of the most vocal opponents of the jab, but has chosen not to directly criticize Trump about it.  That's a prudential judgment, since he knows very well that Trump reacts to any criticism violently due to his fragile ego.  He would accomplish nothing by criticizing Trump directly except to have him develop a hostility toward the Church.

Perhaps you have read where St. Thomas states that not only do you have no obligation to correct/rebuke someone if they are not inclined to accept the correction, but you might even have an obligation to refrain from the rebuke if you feel that it would simply make the more antagonistic.

+Vigano is simply exercising prudence regarding the manner in which he addresses Trump.

Miser continues to slander +Vigano as if he were pro-jab, and Incred slanders him simply because he has had associations in the past with someone who belongs to Opus Dei.  There are numerous +Vigano-slanderers here on the forum.

I'm not making anything up.  Vigano sees Trump as the negotiator of a peace deal to bring forth the 

EQUAL

(does that word raise a flag???)

COEXISTENCE

(does that word raise a flag???)

(they should!)

of nations.

Was Vigano simply exercising the same "prudence" when he lavished love and praise on someone he knew was


"Archbishop" Vigano called McCarrick (when he knew he was a predatory pervert) "His Eminence" and said he was "very much loved from us all" - 46 second video

https://schismatic-home-aloner.com/archbishop-vigano-called-mccarrick-when-he-knew-he-was-a-predatory-pervert-his-eminence-and-said-he-was-very-much-loved-from-us-all/

Here's the thing:

Some see Jєωs coming out of the woodwork, therefore Msgr. Vigano is controlled by Jєωs.

Some see Opus Dei coming out of the woodwork, therefore, Msgr. Vigano is controlled by Opus Dei.

Some see Msgr. Vigano giving Trump a pass on the vax, and therefore we can't listen to anything he says against the vax.

Some see him not condemning Putin, therefore, he must be in cahoots with Russia.

And whatever your pet positions are (flat/round earth; sedevacantisme, sedeprivationisme, Bennyvacantisme, R&R, indult, or Novus Ordo, episcopal orders, etc.), whatever he isn't doing to promote them, its natural, therefore, to consider he is compromised in some way.

Let me tell you what I see (voicing opinions is what a forum is for; you needn't agree with me):

I see a shepherd who, with nothing more than a poison pen, has knocked the entire conciliar edifice off its axis, such that large sections of it, and chunks of all the aforementioned parties have -to one degree or another- gravitated towards him.

And why?

Because whatever other faults he might possess -objectively, or merely according to our chosen crisis orrientation- the sheep hear the voice of the shepherd in his writings and doctrine.

The only precedent I can think of who was able to unite -in some degree- all the parties under the banner of true doctrine was Msgr. Lefebvre (particularly before 1983).

I am not blind to some of the particular concerns this or that faction has regarding Msgr. Vigano, but from my perspective, whatever truth there may be in these complaints, he possesses the two most important qualities necessary in our time:

1) He is somehow able to get through to conciliarists, and drag them to the right, to varying degrees, and in the process

2) He is dismantling the credibility of conciliarism (just look what Bergoglio has been forced to do in the last couple years to stop the drift toward some flavor of traditionalism).

These are arguably the two qualities most essential for the restoration of tradition, and we will not have a Catholic pope until this happens (i.e., they are prerequisites).

For these reasons, I support him (without being blind to the objections some have about him).

Having him arise on the scene is good for the Church and for souls.

Was Vigano simply exercising the same "prudence" when he lavished love and praise on someone he knew was


"Archbishop" Vigano called McCarrick (when he knew he was a predatory pervert) "His Eminence" and said he was "very much loved from us all" - 46 second video

https://schismatic-home-aloner.com/archbishop-vigano-called-mccarrick-when-he-knew-he-was-a-predatory-pervert-his-eminence-and-said-he-was-very-much-loved-from-us-all/

Bombshell.

So, Vigano defenders... your thoughts on this?

Has your support in the Novus Ordo Archlayman wavered a bit?

He disagrees with you, so it's basically the same thing to him. Nevermind any evidence or concerns to the contrary.

Agreed!

Aside from the disreputable website being cited, a sodomite king is still addressed as "Your Majesty," even if no longer "majestic." 

A cardinal's title is "Your Eminence," even if no longer "eminent."

Regarding the video itself, it was from May, 2012, which by that time Msgr. Vigano had already been blowing the whistle on McCarrick for 6 years, and trying to have him disciplined.  Recall it was only when he became convinced the Vatican was covering up the incident, that he went public (2018). 

So for him to have said McCarrick was "beloved by all of us" in 2012 (i.e., before the matter was public, and while he was trying to have McCarrick disciplined) was obviously a perfunctory gesture at a time when he still had hopes the Vatican would do its duty and deal with McCarrick.

Nonsense.  It's because +Vigano supports sodomy ... exactly as Miser is implying, despite the fact that he had to go into hiding precisely for exposing the protection of sodomites by both Bergoglio and Ratzinger.  But don't bother Miser with facts.