@Sanguine @Cyber Liberty Agreed.
But being careful not to "leave fingerprints" might translate to Feinstein deciding to leak it herself, by leaking it directly to a loyal journalist. A staffer doing the dirty work for Feinstein would likely give Feinstein up more quickly than a Socialist Radical journalist would. A staffer could be forced to give her up.
The important point here, it seems to me, is that leaks
always produce fingerprints if we know where to look for the fingerprints. The weak point in the conspiracy will always be the
journalist. It's the first person the investigators will interview under serious pressure for disclosure. So why add
another weak point by involving one's own staffer? Even if the journalist won't talk, the staffers are the next folks to be interviewed in the investigation.
Besides, Feinstein is almost certainly the one who wanted the info linked--so, again, why order someone else to do it when she could still be in a heap of trouble when the staffer confesses? (Heck, the journalist might decide to give up the Senator's lowly staffer rather than sit in jail for contempt while waiting for a court to side with him/her and his/her Freedom of the Press rights. But as I have already intimated, giving up the staffer would likely cook Feinstein's goose.)
Heck, if I were in Feinstein's situation of desperation to get the info out to the press, I would have trusted no one on my staff with the job of leaking. (I might have decided to use an attorney for the cut-out, though.)
Anyway, I do think Feinstein is the best candidate for the leaking. Remember also that she is a Senator who is accustomed to getting away with pretty atrocious deeds.
