There's really very little to say, here.
Mahony should have been sacked a long time ago. He's a destroyer, and apparently a pervert. Or at least a pervert-enabler. And, once again, the unspeakable truth.
We had a sexual abuse problem because malfeasant bishops deliberately, knowingly admitted homosexual perverts to the seminaries and bishops deliberately, knowingly ordained homosexual perverts to the presbyterate. The malfeasant bishops who did this, did it in spite of clear direction from the Pope that homosexual perverts were to be excluded from the clergy.
ANY organization, particularly one that deals extensively with children, that admits homosexual perverts to its leadership will have serious problems.
Mahony should have been REMOVED years ago. Having said that, the focus should be on those who did or allowed those who attacked children, not attack the Church as a whole, but focus on removing those who either did or enabled.
I’ve read some speculation that Mahony would not have gone quietly into this good night, and keeping him on was a way of avoiding schism. Sending someone in after he has retired and does not have the energy or the remaining time to become a rallying point and having them unearth whatever was present to allow him to die with the reputation he deserves is arguably a better strategy. It isn’t the strategy that I would have used—but I’m not the Pope, and there is a reason for that.
I would have had him burnt at the stake some years ago, but that is just me.