The document wasn't "leaked". It was published. How do you think the WT knew to look for this specific document? Do you think that WT staffers, when not perfor

The document wasn't "leaked". It was published. How do you think the WT knew to look for this specific document? Do you think that WT staffers, when not performing mass cult marriages, read every single government document published in DC? In practice, publishing a random document is insufficient for a trial balloon since the vast majority of published government documents get no attention from the public. That's why trial balloons often involve leaks, sometimes instead of, sometimes in addition to publishing a source document. Do you have any idea how many regulations are added each year and how many bills are introduced? I don't see your point here at all. There is a very small quantity of information that the media can reliably present to the public every year. The vast majority of bills and regulations can never be presented to the public for trial ballooning, for reasons of bandwidth if nothing else. Which suggests that it is extremely unlikely that this was a trial balloon. Maybe they weren't interested in public reaction, but they certainly are thinking of these policies. That's precisely my point: you have no evidence that they published this specifically to gauge public reaction. Thus you have no evidence of intent. Which means that your trial balloon accusation is evidence-free.