How can the Prophet's saying (peace be upon him) "There is no cutting for a traitor, nor for a plunderer, nor for an embezzler" be reconciled with his command to cut off the hand of the Makhzumiyyah woman who betrayed a trust?

Scholars have differed concerning the amputation of the hand of one who denies a borrowed item. Some have opted against amputation, based on the generality of the hadith: "There is no cutting (of the hand) for a betrayer, nor for a plunderer, nor for an embezzler," and they explained the hadith of the Makhzumi woman by saying that the mention of denial was for identification purposes, not for the amputation itself. Others said that the hand of one who denies a borrowed item should be amputated, citing the apparent meaning of the hadith of the Makhzumi woman, and they explained the first hadith by saying that it is a general ruling specifically exempted for the one who denies a borrowed item. Al-Nawawi clarified that the Makhzumi woman's hand was amputated for theft, and that the mention of the borrowed item was solely for her identification, and that the majority of scholars and jurists believe there is no amputation for one who denies a borrowed item, while Ahmad and Ishaq said amputation is obligatory.