Not sure what you mean by "spotlight put on him." After all, Vigano has for the most part put the spotlight on himself. Over the last few years (five years or so?) he has published his communications through quite a few different news sources and journalists, some of whom are affiliated with Opus Dei. Since he has put himself out there as an authority on all church matters having to do with the Crisis, then he's gonna get some scrutiny. That's just how it is.

+Vigano's talk is amazing.  It's a must listen.

He coins a new term also, calling those who criticize Bergoglio without recognizing the problem with Vatican II and the other Conciliar popes as "Montinians" ... basically talking about Barnhardt, Mazza, Kramer, and other Bennyvacantists.

But Fr. Kramer has been recognizing the problems of Vatican II for a long time, here is one example:

In summary, +Vigano holds that this crisis is unprecedented by anything in Church history, that it could only be part of the foretold Great Apostasy.

He takes a bit of a shot at the Bennyvacantists, a very subtle diplomatic shot, saying that even though it's possible that Ratzinger didn't resign properly, that this problem goes way beyond a canonical problem.  It also goes beyond Bergoglio's adherence to this or that heresy (of which he said, as an aside, that he's done many times), but to an open apostasy.

He says that Bergoglio is an infiltrator working under Luciferian intelligence on behalf of the enemies of the Church intent upon infiltrating and destroying it.

He cuts into those who claim that the problem is limited to Bergoglio, but says it started with Vatican II, the 1789 in the Church, and listed John XIII, Paul VI, JP I, JPI, and BXVI (much to Barnhardt's chagrin no doubt) as accomplices in the promotion of their acceptance of the Masonic principles "liberte, egalite, fraternite" into the Church.  He basically says it's not just Bergoglio but all these V2 papal claimants were in on it, in on the revolution.

He takes a swipe at SSPX for fence-sitting and others who play ball with Bergoglio, holding that there must be a complete break, where we're either for the Church or against it.

He implies a form of sede-impoundsim, sede-privationism, where he says we have moral certainty that Jorge is not the pope, though we lack the authority to publicly declare him a non-pope.

Also, he says that St. Robert Bellarmine never envisioned a situation where there's no one left in the hierarchy to call out a heretical Pope, but they would deal with it ... whereas now the entire hierarchy are corrupted and are never going to remove him, so this situation is beyond human remedy and can only be solved by God.