"if we are to believe the article..."

Or if we are to swallow the intended implication of the article without much investigation. The hot-button term "steal" doesn't fit how an average person would describe the situation even if "theft" is the charge he's facing.

This is the contractor who was hoarder. He took documents home and kept them. There's no implication he did anything beyond keeping them and considerable reason to think he very intended to keep the information otherwise secret.

Sure, it was a violation of protocol. It was a potential disaster if some entity found out and could take advantage. But so far, there's no implication of any information being leaked.