That this was the work of an otherwise uninvolved opportunist is always a possibility (it came to mind while considering that the document was from Feb 10, unma

That this was the work of an otherwise uninvolved opportunist is always a possibility (it came to mind while considering that the document was from Feb 10, unmarked, and had been stapled), but I am almost certain it was not done for financial gain. Maybe I am naive, but I do not think news organizations pay their confidential sources very much for their trouble. So it just seems unlikely in this case.