THE CHURCH MILITANT - BELEAGUERED BY BERGOGLIANISM

Marco Tosatti has become the object of ‘calumny and defamation’, as Bergoglio and Maradiaga might use those words, by two major para-Vatican sites – IL SISMOGRAFO, the ultra-Bergogliac site run by Chilean Luis Badilla (after a long career at Vatican Radio) who wrote an anti-Tosatti screed yesterday, and to which Tosatti promptly responded, followed today by Avvenire, the newspaper of the Italian bishops’ conference that has become more Bergogliac than even Dario Vigano’s consolidated Vatican media, with an editorial written by Stefania Falasca, longtime friend of Bergoglio since he was a cardinal. As I have not had time to translate Tosatti’s response to Badilla, I shall go ahead and translate his response to Falasca and thereby hit two birds with one stone.

Tosatti, of course, has the definitive question for Falasca: Since you are so close to Bergoglio, and as a journalist, why don’t you just go and ask him, “Is it true Vigano spoke to you about McCarrick as he says he did?” But, of course, neither she nor Badilla nor any other Bergogliac would dare do that because they already know the answer, which Bergoglio would never articulate definitively, YES or NO, not even to them, to avoid self-incrimination. (Same bind he had with the DUBIA.)

Meanwhile, not content with just shooting the messenger of dark truth, Mons Vigano – since they can’t shoot down his factual affirmations corroborated by other prelates and supported by documentation that Vigano cites and locates – now they’re also hitting at Tosatti, alleging that Mons. Vigano’s Testimony is largely a product of his, Tosatti's, ‘creativity’. All this, folks, spells DESPERATION writ large among the most fanatic of Bergogliacs. (Personally, I think there was also a lot of jealousy, too, that AP should have devoted an article to Tosatti’s contribution to the testimony!)

Avvenire crazed like Il Sismografo
Falasca, since you can do it,
why don’t you just ask the pope
if Vigano talked to him about McCarrick?
Translated from

August 30, 2018

Today, I would have wanted to limit my post to publishing the reflection of Mons. Athanasius Schneider on Mons Vigano’s Testimony. Unfortunately, an editorial by Stefania Falasca in Avvenire obliges me to reply. First, let me cite what she says:

---

Finally we have the cherry on the cake in this whole ‘affaire’. In a long conversation with the Associated Press news agency, a journalist who writes a blog that is notoriously anti-Bergoglio, in the grip of an uncontrollable euphoria of narcissistic protagonism, [one would us those very words to describe Jorge Bergoglio’s habitual mindset], managed in a few minutes to offer on a silver platter the clay feet of the inept operation: [Tsk-tsk! What an inept mixed metaphor!]: he confessed publicly that it was he who wrote the script for the so-called testimony-denunciation. These were his textual words: “I did professional editing. Namely, we worked over his draft, the material of which is substantially the Nuncio’s, to make sure that it would read easily and be journalistically useful”. [Falasca appears to have read a different report from that I posted in the previous page, or else, she took the unspeakable license to claim these were Tosatti’s ‘textual words’ when they seem to be her paraphrase of what Tosatti told AP, as I do not see any such ‘text’ in Nicole Winfield’s AP story.] In short, a creative work to advance a journalistically useful program, and of which the only true precision is in its clockwork mechanism. [She goes from bad to worse. Whatever made her think she was capable of writing an effective poison letter that does not sound as absurd as she makes it!]

---

It sounded familiar. Since, in fact, this was the same twaddle peddled yesterday by Luis Badilla in Il Sismografo, and which I was obliged to refute in yesterday’s post.

But let me say once more in simple words, so that everyone understands. Mons Vigano contacted me a month ago because he wanted to give an interview after having read – on a site that Falasca knows very well because it is part of the Bergoglio Press Gang – allusions, insinuations and falsehoods on Monsignors Montalvo and Sambi [Vigano’s immediate predecessors as Apostolic Nuncio to the USA] and on Benedict XVI. Montalvo and Sambi are deceased so they cannot defend themselves, and Benedict XVI tries to keep silent as much as he can. One must remind Falasca of Talleyrand’s motto, “Above all, not too much zeal!”

When we next saw each other a few weeks later, he told me that instead of giving an interview, he had prepared a text which he wanted published. So we read it together. My contribution was to suggest certain cuts, to clarify terms and situations not easily understandable to those who are not familiar with Vatican doings, sto spell out acronyms, and to see to it that the discourse flowed well. That’s what is called editing, Stefania. So, I am sorry for you and your colleagues, nothing creative there. What’s mine in the Testimony is what I have just described.

Anyone who reads the document would know that it is the personal testimony of someone who has lived the events he describes in the way he describes them. What does ‘creativity’ have to do with it? Either what Vigano says is true or not. [That is really the only legitimate question – which none of the Bergogliacs wish to address because they are unable to refute much of it – except Vigano’s conversations with Bergoglio, which only the latter can deny or refute, which he has refused to do, and why ever not???]

I am very sorry I cannot say that I wrote the whole thing to make you and your customers happy. But I did not. As for narcissism – well then, I am narcissistic, at least about this matter, which is a healthy thing if you ask your lord and master who is an expert at it. In which my narcissism is limited to respond to a colleague who wants to tell a tale about how the Vigano testimony came about.

But a piece of advice, Stefania! When you wish to attack someone, take the time to look at what he has written. You surely saw that I already responded to your mentor, Luis Badilla. I understand that it’s a difficult bind for you [the Bergogliacs], and in order to create diversions from the central point of the Testimony, you and others have to desperately struggle to come up with theatrical special effects, intrigues, conspiracies, even deigning to attack a nobody like me (surely, a sign of desperation).

But there is a very simple way to get out of your bind for a journalist like you. Since we all know of your intimate friendship with the then cardinal and now pope Bergoglio (some malicious wags say it was thanks to this that suddenly you became an editorialist for Avvenire after coming out of the smoking ruins of Giulio Andreotti’s 30 Giorni), why then, since you can so easily do it unlike the rest of us, don’t you go to the pope and ask, “Holy Father, is it true what Vigano wrote?”, to wit:

---

Immediately after, the Pope asked me in a deceitful way: “What is Cardinal McCarrick like?” I answered him with complete frankness and, if you want, with great naiveté: “Holy Father, I don’t know if you know Cardinal McCarrick, but if you ask the Congregation for Bishops there is a dossier this thick about him. He corrupted generations of seminarians and priests and Pope Benedict ordered him to withdraw to a life of prayer and penance.” The Pope did not make the slightest comment about those very grave words of mine and did not show any expression of surprise on his face, as if he had already known the matter for some time, and he immediately changed the subject.”

---

So you could simply ask him: “Does this correspond with the truth? Or is it mere invention?

Then you can give us all his reply, whatever it may be. And thus you could contribute, for once, to disseminate entire truths, not half truths or fragments thereof. Please, do it!

P.S. Falasca is married to a more reputable Vaticanista, Gianni Valente, who obviously enjoys the same intimacy with Bergoglio as his wife does. So if they could both team up and ask Bergoglio - to get a definitive answer in a scoop they could share with the world, why haven't they done so? Because they know they will never get a definitive answer which would not be self-incriminating for Bergoglio!