Breaking: Man takes hostages at Clinton’s NH campaign office; Update: Local paper names suspect, says earlier suspect was misidentified; Update: Last hostage released, suspect in custody

posted at 2:17 pm on November 30, 2007 by Bryan

Going on right now in Rochester, NH. Clinton wasn’t at the office or even in the state. She’s in Virginia today. The man has what appears to be a bomb strapped to his chest.

An armed man has taken two campaign workers hostage at the Hillary Clinton campaign office in Rochester, police said.

Officials with the campaign confirmed that there were two workers taken hostage in the office on 28 North Main St.. A woman and her baby told workers at a neighboring business that she was released by the hostage-taker.

“A young woman with a 6-month or 8-month-old infant came rushing into the store just in tears, and she said, ‘You need to call 911. A man has just walked into the Clinton office, opened his coat and showed us a bomb strapped to his chest with duct tape,'” witness Lettie Tzizik said.

There are several police officers positioned across the street from the office, crouched down behind cruisers with guns drawn, according to a reported at the scene.

Update (AP): MSNBC says the guy asked to speak to Hillary.

Update (AP): As of 3:05, WMUR claims that one of the hostages was let go. I’m not sure if he’s referring to one of the earlier hostages or one of the remaining two. Sounded like the latter.

Update (AP): WMUR is a little unsure too but they now think both of the remaining hostages have been released. They’re trying to confirm that everyone’s out.

Update (AP): Surprise — he has issues. “The suspect was a well-known local man with history of emotional issues who told his son to watch the news, a well-placed law enforcement source told ABC News’ Pierre Thomas.” Bill Shaheen, Hillary’s NH co-chair, says “We’ve had no security issues, and I’m not even sure this is a threat to her, to my knowledge.”

Update (AP): I’m not going to repeat the name until it’s confirmed but Carl Cameron’s interviewing a kid on Fox who says the suspect is a friend of the family and that the guy’s been having mental problems lately, allegedly complaining that the government is planting bugs in his head.

Update (AP): All right, it looks like the suspect is confirmed as [deleted]. HuffPo’s putting together a dossier on him, doubtless hoping against hope that something turns up to suggest he’s a conservative. A friend of [deleted]’s suggested a few minutes ago on Fox that he was paranoid, believing that there was some conspiracy of people out to get him.

The “bomb” appears to be road flares.

Update (AP): The cops are giving a press conference and insisting that it’s still a hostage situation — although they won’t confirm that there are still people inside.

Update (AP): Someone’s been burned because MSNBC is reporting that the suspect is someone other than the person I mentioned above. I removed the name and the link to HuffPo; I’ll update again when we know for sure.

Update (AP): WMUR is saying now that there are still two hostages inside. There’s also something about the suspect having been distraught from a divorce and drinking for hours.

Update (AP): I’m guessing it’s MSNBC that’s been burned and that the original suspect is the correct one because they haven’t repeated the name of the second suspect for awhile now. Smells like a climbdown. Drudge had better hope they’re wrong because he’s got the first suspect’s name at the top of the Report right now.

Update (AP): As of 5:38, it looks like another hostage has been released.

Update (AP): Looks like it’s MSNBC 1, Fox/Drudge 0. Foster’s Daily Democrat says the second suspect is the correct one.

Update (AP): And Fox is doubling down. They’re still going with the first suspect. Quite a subplot.

Update (AP): Fox is backing off the earlier suspect’s name now and saying authorities are naming the second guy. I still won’t print it here until we have a little more confidence, but the second suspect is known to use aliases. Could he and the first suspect be the same guy?

Update (AP): Whoever he is, the cops have him in custody now.

Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air



Trackback URL


No reason to suspect a conspiracy, here. My guess is the guy was a Democrat but not a plant of any kind, right or left. Most likely scenario: he was off his meds and upset about his pending divorce so he just snapped. Since we know that he has a history of political protesting, he probably chose the Clinton campaign as a sort of surrogate for his estranged wife (or maybe his mother).

Why do I think he was a Dem? Easy. The drama has been over for hours now and the media hasn’t reported his political affiliation in any of the background stories that have come out. If he had been a Republican, you can bet they would mention it at every opportunity, even if it was obviously irrelevent.

And, really, how many Republicans want to talk to Clinton…?

JackOfClubs on November 30, 2007 at 10:15 PM

Sorry, but I don’t mind saying the “conspiratorial” comments seems just a bit over the top on purpose. I call dem spoof trolls big time.

I’d note that Crooks R US and other suddenly outraged lefty blogs routinely host with no moderation hate spew and death wishes of Republicans on a level unbelievable level- Dem Underground, Kos, Huffington post, firegoglake being some of the worst hate sites. In fact the only comments they delete aren’t their death fantasies and hate, but any comment that doesn’t toe their rigid ideological line. Firedog is the worst. She can’t handle any dissent. Sends her in a total tizzy.

I think it’s pretty obvious these over the top comments are Dougj’s.

Topsecretk9 on November 30, 2007 at 10:30 PM

BacaDog on November 30, 2007 at 9:55 PM

i’ve noticed a lot of posters here who, though the last open registration was several months ago, only started commenting recently.

jummy on November 30, 2007 at 10:35 PM

jummy on November 30, 2007 at 10:35 PM

That’s what I was impling too.

Topsecretk9 on November 30, 2007 at 10:41 PM

btw, the first comment under the huffpo post i excerpted from above was asserting the same conspiracy theory that got rightwinged slapped and c&l in a hipicritical tizzy.

not that i am by any means disputing the editorship’s decision on that.

but if this were the mirror situation, and hotair were a lefty blog reporting on a deranged loon who had busted into giuliani hq with a fake bomb strapped to his chest, bryan and allah would have been a lot busier deleting a shrill choir of progressive commenters luridly announcing their hopes for a mass annihalation of “neothug reichwing fag jewboy scum”.

even from the tone of the c&l post, in which amato strained to make something notable of a poster here advancing an interpretation of the event shared by the dlc-haters at huffpo and elsewhere, one can taste and touch his resentment of having to police for and delete sentiments which he knows are vile and disgusting, but which he is nonetheless personally sympathetic with.

jummy on November 30, 2007 at 10:49 PM

here’s that post i was talking about. from “lovethesinner”, who has declared for obama…

I just got done watching Hillary, speaking live about the incident in New Hampshire (11/30) and I think I can smell a plant. Somebody needs to check if Frank Luntz is working for Hillary, because it sure is working along his methods.

Here’s what the lizard brain sees:

Political terrorist
young people lives at stake
a peacefull resolution
a serious, (but not stern) Hillary, trimphant (although without bullhorn, and not standing on rubble,)


Tucker Carlson is not someone I usually agree with, but when the feed from the scene was interupted early it caught him laughing out loud and then quickly taking on the air of a pastor at a funeral. I agree with the laughing out loud, not the pretence at seriousness. (Isn’t he always using the term “phoney?”)

I can only imagine that Hillary is losing so much traction in New Hampshire that it was worth putting her own worker’s offline for a day, just to get something to talk about in the weeks to come.

jummy on November 30, 2007 at 10:59 PM

jummy on November 30, 2007 at 10:35 PM

Topsecretk9 on November 30, 2007 at 10:41 PM

My guess is, it’ll only get worse the closer we get to next November. I don’t know how AP and Bryan can be as patient as they are sometimes.

BacaDog on November 30, 2007 at 11:02 PM

even from the tone of the c&l post, in which amato strained to make something notable of a poster here advancing an interpretation of the event shared by the dlc-haters at huffpo and elsewhere, one can taste and touch his resentment of having to police for and delete sentiments which he knows are vile and disgusting, but which he is nonetheless personally sympathetic with.

This is exactly what makes the Crooks R US and the rest of the lefty blogs outrage so preposterous. They allow the most vile of comments and often make the vile comments themselves.

Much like their retard insinuation that “goggling” someone constitutes stalking.

OK so Crooks R US and all the other lefty blogs are going to chastise their commenters for their distasteful comments, conspiratorial “question the timing” and hate and the lefty blogs are swearing off goggling an opponent or perceived opponents ala Jeff Gannon stalking from here on out?


well, I’ll be watching.

Topsecretk9 on November 30, 2007 at 11:02 PM

Topsecretk9 on November 30, 2007 at 11:02 PM

… they stalk the conservative blogs searching for a truther post about Hill and the hostage incident today.

BacaDog on November 30, 2007 at 11:06 PM

I call dem spoof trolls big time.

You gotta admit though, we have had some pretty good trolls here. GregH, Ropera to name a couple. Ahhh. Now they were trolls.

BacaDog on November 30, 2007 at 11:09 PM

You gotta admit though, we have had some pretty good trolls here. …Ropera…
BacaDog on November 30, 2007 at 11:09 PM

No recent memory of Ropera trolling. Would appreciate evidence. I haven’t seen Ropera for a long time, untll recently with a sprnkling of reasonable/on-topic, possibly anecdotal (IIRC), comments.

RushBaby on December 1, 2007 at 1:10 AM

Some thoughts now that its over:

1. Had he used a gun, there would have been more gun control legislation hitting the House floor on Monday morning. But since bombs are already banned by law…

2. This comes out on the same day as the poll showing Republicans self-report better mental health than Democrats. Which leads me to…

3. This guy is likely a registered Democrat as the issue he put his life on the line for is mental health care entitlement. When this fact comes out, it will lead to all sorts of conspiracy theories concerning the Clintons. Rush said as this was happening that nothing happens on accident with the Clintons. I disagree in this case, but it is up to us to dig out if he is a left-wing kook.

Valiant on December 1, 2007 at 8:34 AM

If this guy is anything other than himself on his own mission…

Recall Lee Harvey Oswald, set up to take the fall.

Update, Hillary behind in Iowa is told that the inevitable Democrat Candidate CAN NOT AFFORD a single loss.

Find: a susceptible victim to urge on and exploit horrendously.

This guy obviously suffering paranoia would be so easy for the Clinton machine to abuse, leaving no evidence. Though his personal computer may be searched, who would bother to trace ads received; unrecorded telephone calls received would not prove anything, either.

No harm done yet, gratefully. IF anyone other than the flare-man was involved in this Clinton episode, it was Hillary’s cronies in need of a sympathy card for her.

Recall Romney’s Provo associates instigation of the so-called “push poll” and Romney’s assertion that any Mormon fact finding is bigotted and that any recall of his record is personally offensive, Romney’s cronies HAD TO TEST THE PUBLIC WATER ON THE ENTIRE MORMON ISSUS–and now CONTINUE to advise Mitt to shut-up on his religion, having no leg to stand on under scrutiny. It was Romney who had the “most to gain” from that entire political charade, begging for sympathy while granting none. As per Romney and family values, a blogger quoted William Blake that I paraphrase here; a man can not care for his progeny if he denies his progenitors. The new & improved Mormon facade absolutely denies the righteousness of their polygamous progenitors who were forced by DIRECT REVELATION FROM GOD to be polygamous–but though the new & improved Mormons eschew polygamy for its ugly public realism, MORMONISM CAN NOT REFUTE THEIR GOD’S REVELATION. Here is the point:

AS A DEVOUT MORMON, MITT ROMNEY CAN NOT DENY THAT HE IS BOUND TO PRACTICE POLYGAMY IN ORDER TO ENTER GOD’S PRESENCE IN THE MORMON CELESTIAL KINGDOM. The Mormon escape clause with polygamy was to blame the US Government for preventing their religious fulfillment during this life, and merely postpone plural marriage until the next. None-the-less, Mormons who have taken their endowments in their temple ceremony CAN NOT REFUTE that polygamy is still by Mormon doctrine (that they call the Gospel of Jesus Christ) a requirement to entry into the Celestial Kingdom where their god lives and where they will be gods with their god, copulating spirit children for the earths’ that they will create. Romney says that he is proud of his Mormon ancestors, which is fine except that he hedges every question without answer, only rebuff. For instance, “So I changed my mind. Do you have a problem with that?!” The problem exists when the candidate refuses to explicate his reasoning for the record. Romney demands that everyone take him at his word; yet he allows his word to change according to the political winds. No surprise, that is according to Mormon practice. The #1 Mormon routine is to “avoid the appearance of evil”–and the Mormon Priesthood meetings direct all men NOT to help any female other than their own wife so as to avoid the appearance of evil. Their specific case in lesson point: if alone in your car, DO NOT ASSIST a Mormon female walking home with groceries in a rain storm, even with her baby in a stroller; someone might see you together in your car and start a rumor. THAT is the Mormon priesthood at work in your community, folks. To call this factual information “anti-Mormon” is irrational.

maverick muse on December 1, 2007 at 10:08 AM

RightWinged on November 30, 2007 at 3:23 PM
ToddonCapeCod on November 30, 2007 at 7:14 PM
StuLongIsland on November 30, 2007 at 9:14 PM
maverick muse on December 1, 2007 at 10:08 AM

You conspiracy fans need to get out of the house a little more often.

Bradky on December 1, 2007 at 10:33 AM

My cynicism meter is up. This loser did not take a candidate hostage but he took the candidate’s office hostage which is good enough to get the name play for hours. There is an excess of press in NH to work the primary stories from now to election. If it was not a campaign office it would be a local story.

The candidate gets to be a victim by proxy which is a piece of cake. The frosting is a small permanent residue of toxic story that can be milked many news cycles:

The Poor Sicko/ Dangerous Nut and His Sad Life/ Suspicious Lifestyle
Candidates and the dangers they face
Who killed John F Kennedy etc

I am grateful it ended peacefully or we would have been hit with a news tsunami. I guarantee they have searched the perps past for political affiliation and membership in convenient organizations

entagor on December 1, 2007 at 12:01 PM

maverick muse on December 1, 2007 at 10:08 AM

What does an irrational anti-Mormon rant have to do with this thread? At all? Are you just jealous of all the attention Leeland Eisenberg got for spewing his nutty gibberish?

ReubenJCogburn on December 1, 2007 at 3:15 PM

I am grateful it ended peacefully or we would have been hit with a news tsunami. I guarantee they have searched the perps past for political affiliation and membership in convenient organizations

entagor on December 1, 2007 at 12:01 PM

I’m just glad it ended without bloodshed. Period.

Bradky on December 1, 2007 at 3:19 PM

Word has it that Hillary remained calm. Oh goody.
WHy the hell wouldn’t she be? SHe was no where near the friggin place. Did she express any gratitude that no one was hurt? Thats the main concern. pffft.

johnnyU on December 1, 2007 at 5:49 PM

Gratefully, no one was injured. But I knew it was coming:

Eisenberg said he wanted help getting psychiatric care, but had been turned away because he didn’t have the money.

‘Ordinary people need help’
“I need to speak to Hillary Clinton,” CNN quoted him as saying. “Something’s got to change. Ordinary people need help” with their insurance.

The network described Eisenberg as “well-spoken, articulate and impassioned about his cause”…

N.B.: text with their insurance is added outside of flare-man’s quote. America already has mental health facilities available for the indigent, so the incident’s premise is false.

Please, spare us the we NEED Hillary plea–save us Hillary! Geez, the ex-convict with mental health issues hardly represents the “normal people” to whom he refers–as if ANYONE needs the likes of Hillary to be saved.

Such a clean operation…such majesty in Hillary’s response…Hillary can not afford a single loss…

As it would be, flare-man is just another Hillary follower, supporting her in his own way, whether directed to do so or not.

Given second thought, who actually allows that kind of dramatic stunt to necessitate a desire for Hillary in their lives?

maverick muse on December 1, 2007 at 7:53 PM

As per the public not recognizing the difference between dynamite sticks and flares, do they really look so much the same? I, like they, couldn’t yet say.

maverick muse on December 1, 2007 at 7:58 PM