It is certainly an interesting convergence of events:

1) Francis to suppress TLM
2) Vigano to be excommunicated
3) SSPX preparing the terrain to consecrate bishops

Is there any connection?

"And if, as the new SSPX tells us, there’s no doubt regarding the validity of the new rites of episcopal consecration or ordination, than this perceived need becomes even more inexplicable.

3) On the other hand, if Fr. de Jorna simply means by the continuation of the Church that nobody will consecrate bishops for them, I would remind the SSPX that their founder never considered the SSPX to be synonymous with the Church."

First off, even though I'm barely out of college, I recognize the true Church(Catholic Faith), from a false religion. Pope Francis preaches and promotes bishops of a false "VAtican II" religion.....especially since now the main quality looked for in new bishops of his is openness and acceptance to homosexuality and the sin of homo relationships. Jesus Christ and the traditions of the Faith are not valued....what is is homosexuality, inclusiveness, welcoming to migrants, LGBTQ and TRANS acceptance, etc. This is a perversion of the Catholic Faith, it is Bergoglianism, so I would never accept as valid any of his cardinals or bishops. Therefore the SSPX is totally justified in creating another 4 or more SSPX traditional bishops.
Regards to #2 question, when Archbishop Lefebvre consecrated his bishops and founded the SSPX, the Catholic Church was, despite Vatican II, still the Catholic Faith. But today, the warped and heretical agenda of Pope Francis and his people is not in the least Catholic, but rather a betrayal of it......so the SSPX and their bishops, old and new represent a continuation of the Catholic Faith.....as do groups of sedevacantists with their own bishops around he world.
Considering the homosexualist agenda of Pope Francis and his people, and their rejection of the Catholic tradition and Faith, the SSPX is totally justified to create as many bishops as it needs......they are legit. Bergoglian bishops are not( but Bergoglian bishops probably all are homos).

Questions:

1) Fr. de Jorna says these new bishops will be necessary for the continuation of the Church. I would ask him why? If the conciliar church (what +Fellay calls the “official church”) is the Catholic Church, it has thousands of bishops, and really needs no more to continue at present than it already has.

2) And if, as the new SSPX tells us, there’s no doubt regarding the validity of the new rites of episcopal consecration or ordination, than this perceived need becomes even more inexplicable.

3) On the other hand, if Fr. de Jorna simply means by the continuation of the Church that nobody will consecrate bishops for them, I would remind the SSPX that their founder never considered the SSPX to be synonymous with the Church.

4) The question also arises as to whether these consecrations are already secretly agreed to by Rome. Recall that in 2018 the SSPX sent the results of its General Chapter to Rome for ratification, signaling that it was under Roman control (and one does not do such a thing only to ignore a Roman decision). In this case, has the SSPX again sent dossiers to Rome, with the latter approving candidates it considers acceptable? How will we ever know?

5) Another question regarding the alleged need for bishops: If the SSPX considers the 1968 rite of episcopal consecration to be certainly valid, such that it uses +Hounder to consecrate holy oils, etc., then why not simply obtain the services of other allegedly traditional bishops from the conciliar church like Schneider, Muller, Burke, etc. whom Rome would certainly prefer to the SSPX having more real bishops (even if these newly consecrated bishops were controlled or chosen by Rome)?

6) In 2015, the SSPX issued a communique denouncing the consecration of +Faure by +Williamson, because these two allegedly rejected the authority of Rome (see here: Consecration of Fr. Jean-Michel Faure ). Shall I conclude then, as asked above, that these consecrations come with the secret permission of Rome (another indication that the SSPX is captured by the conciliar church)?

Conversely, if the SSPX really does consecrate bishops against the will of Rome, how will it not be guilty of the indictment it made against +Faure/+Williamson, when it declared:

“ The Society of St. Pius X denounces this episcopal consecration of Fr. Faure, which, despite the assertions of both clerics concerned, is not at all comparable to the consecrations of 1988. All the declarations of Bishop Williamson and Fr. Faure prove abundantly that they no longer recognize the Roman authorities, except in a purely rhetorical manner.”

7) A year ago, the SSPX published this snide article, flatly denying the report that preparations for consecrations were underway: Bishops for the SSPX to be Consecrated on June 30, 2023?
Am I now to believe that in the last year the SSPX suddenly realized a need for bishops and began preparations? If not, why the deception?