LifeSiteNews summarizes the situation well. Cardinal Wuerl claimed months ago that "I can report that no claim - credible or otherwise - has been made against Cardinal McCarrick during his time here in Washington."
McCarrick was Archbishop of Washington between 2001 and 2006. Robert Ciolek was a seminarian during the 1980s when he was molested by McCarrick. Ciolek settled with the Church on that in 2005. Documentation in the offices of the Pittsburgh diocese shows that then-Bishop Wuerl was aware of these matters when the settlement was issued. Wuerl was aware of that claim against McCarrick, then, in 2005, "during his time here in Washington". This past August Archbishop Vigano stated that when he said that he himself broached these matters with Wuerl several times.
Of course the Archdiocese of Washington is in "damage control mode", as evidenced from this statement issued Jan 10. Notice in that statement the attempt to deflect blame for the lie by claiming that the statement "referred to claims of sexual abuse of a minor by Archbishop McCarrick"? Sorry, that doesn't fly - but it fits well with the general talking points that have as their aim the deflection of attention from the abuse of young vulnerable men.
All that said, Wuerl did report the matter in 2004 to the Papal Nuncio, who was Archbishop Gabriel Montalvo. What did Montalvo, in turn, do with that report? At the time, Pope John Paul II was on Peter's chair. Did the information ever reach him? These are questions that deserve answers. For now, it is clear that we cannot rely on Cardinal Wuerl to be honest; Archbishop Vigano stated that succinctly when he said of Wuerl that "he lies shamelessly".
The blog "Complicit Clergy" is circulating a petition for the complete removal of Cardinal Wuerl from public ministry (as opposed to this sham "resignation" in name only that is now going on). I have signed it and urge all readers to sign it.
Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Paragon of Justice -- Catholic Bishop
40 minutes ago