This discussion was initiated by my saying that denying the Holocaust was not an offence which carried excommunication either 'latae' or 'ferendae sententiae'.
You seem to be implying that because I didn't condemn such a denial that I approved of it. I made my position clear when I said, "Were he a layman now, I would not expect him to be accepted even for the priesthood." Which means that I would not expect anyone who publicly denied the Holocaust to be accepted for the priesthood let alone the episcopacy.
Holocaust denial is non-PC.  PC  places a straight jacket around the intellect. It dictates that on certain questions, historic in this case, one can only have one opinion which must conform to the officially accepted view.
If someone has a different view, do you not think that if you disagree with them, rather than condemn them out of hand, you should accompany them and discern with them whether their view is right or wrong in the internal forum.