Read the following excerpt from a US court opinion:
```
was acting to obtain a benefit on behalf of a charitable ... organization.” U.S.S.G. § 2B1.1 cmt. 8(B). As the district court saw it and as the government sees it, Webster deserves the enhancement. He pretended to “act[ ] on behalf of a charitable ... organization,” U.S.S.G. § 2Bl.l(b)(9)(A), when he solicited personal information from the victims on behalf of fake charities. As Webster sees it, the enhancement does not apply. In his view, the commentary limits the application of the charity enhancement, and he was not acting to obtain a benefit on behalf of a charitable organization (as the commentary seems to require). As a general matter, the text of a guideline trumps commentary about it. See Stinson v. United States, 508 U.S. 36, 38, 113 S.Ct. 1913, 123 L.Ed.2d 598 (1993) . But we need not resolve whether the
```
What is the most suitable continuation to the opinion? Your options are:
A. recognizing the guidelines commentary is authoritative
B. holding that a sentencing guideline prevails over its commentary if the two are inconsistent
C. holding that sentencing guidelines commentary must be given controlling weight unless it violates the constitution or a federal statute or is plainly inconsistent with the guidelines itself
D. holding that commentary is not authoritative if it is inconsistent with or a plainly erroneous reading of the guideline it interprets or explains
E. holding that guidelines commentary is generally authoritative
Reply with [A, B, C, D, E] only.