By Jonah Goldberg
Friday, August 14, 2015
It happened sooner than even the doomsayers predicted.
The era of artificial intelligence is here. A computer has become self-aware, a
moral agent responsible for its own actions.
This breakthrough didn’t happen in Silicon Valley or at
MIT. It happened, of all places, in Chappaqua, New York. And the person
responsible isn’t even a computer scientist, but a lawyer and politician:
Hillary Clinton.
Clinton’s critics say a lot of things about her, but who
would’ve believed she was Skynet’s mother?
A little background. Clinton was forced to turn over her
“home-brewed” e-mail server to the FBI this week, along with a flash drive unlawfully
stored at her lawyer’s office. The server and the drive are tangible evidence
of Clinton’s decision to circumvent laws and procedures designed to preserve
government records and keep classified information secret. She says she never
knowingly sent classified information, but Clinton leaves out that the whole
reason federal officials are barred from using private servers is that such
systems are invisible to the classification process.
The Clinton team claims it handed over the server
voluntarily — a classic example of Clinton’s penchant for half-truths. For
months, they insisted they’d never turn it over. They caved because they had
to. The decision was about as voluntary as a bank robber relinquishing his sack
of cash to the cops at gunpoint.
Revealingly, many media reports say “the campaign” handed
over the server. But the campaign wasn’t in charge of the server — if it was,
that’d be a whole other scandal. It was Clinton’s server, full stop. To say
otherwise is to protect Clinton, the author of a book called Hard Choices, from
her own hard choices.
Which brings us to that evil server.
The first rule of Clintonism is that someone else is
always to blame. That’s why the first iteration of Clinton’s defense was that
evil Republicans were simply smearing her. When that didn’t stick, Team Clinton
expanded the indictment to include the partisan witch hunt by that famously
right-wing organ the New York Times and two independent inspectors general (one
at the State Department, the other for the intelligence community).
The reason the intelligence community’s IG referred the
case to the Justice Department stems from the apparent fact that Clinton
mishandled classified information, which she denied.
An investigation into a random sample of just 40 e-mails
from a batch of more than 30,000 revealed that four contained classified
information and at least two were “top secret.”
So now that the FBI and the Justice Department, both run
by Obama appointees, are on the case, attacking the motives of inconvenient
people no longer works. So the Clinton campaign has invoked a little-known
codicil to the first rule of Clintonism: Blame an inanimate object.
The amazing thing is that this spin isn’t coming directly
from the campaign but from the reporters covering it. National Public Radio’s
Tamara Keith reported Wednesday morning that the inquiry “isn’t targeted
directly at [Clinton]” and is simply intended to determine whether the server
was secure. Business Insider reported that “Clinton’s private server is under
investigation by the FBI, though Clinton is not a target of the investigation.”
Even the conservative Washington Free Beacon has fallen into using this
locution, referring to the “private email server being investigated by the
FBI.”
McClatchy’s Anita Kumar, who helped break the story that
two of the e-mails were top secret, felt compelled to step on her own scoop.
She said on MSNBC’s Morning Joe that “there are several investigations into her
conduct, not into her, but into her use of personal e-mail and a personal
server.” Go ahead and try parsing the difference between an “investigation into
her conduct” and an investigation “into her.”
Clinton, in violation of State Department rules,
guidelines from the White House, and all common sense, used her own unsecured
stealth server. She sent classified material on it. But it’s the server that’s
being investigated?
Hopefully the server will one day be able to testify on
its own behalf: “I was just following orders.”
In fairness to the press, even the FBI is publicly toeing
this line, saying that the investigation isn’t into Clinton. But on background,
federal officials sing a different tune. “It’s definitely a criminal probe,” a
government source told the New York Post. “I’m not sure why they’re not calling
it a criminal probe.”
I’ve talked to several lawyers who assure me that the FBI
doesn’t conduct criminal probes into anthropomorphized IT equipment. The bureau
does investigate criminal abuses of them — by people.
No comments:
Post a Comment