Hostages taken at Clinton headquarters in New Hampshire

Details are still very sketchy, but Reuters notes stunning developments at Hillary Clinton’s New Hampshire headquarters.

An armed man took people hostage at a New Hampshire campaign office for Democratic presidential candidate Sen. Hillary Clinton Friday, New Hampshire’s WMUR TV reported.

Clinton, who was scheduled to campaign in Virginia on Friday, was not present at the office in Rochester, New Hampshire, according to TV reports.

The number of hostages was unclear, WMUR said. A separate report on MSNBC said a man claiming to have a bomb strapped to him walked into the campaign office.

A local TV station adds that the incident began about an hour ago, and it’s unclear just how many hostages are inside. Surrounding buildings have been locked down.

Sen. Clinton is DC for the DNC’s winter meeting, and was not scheduled to be in New Hampshire today.

I don’t have access to a TV right now, but if readers are watching the news and have updates, please feel free to add reports on developments in the comments section.

Update: The Union Leader is reporting that a woman with a small child was released and went to a nearby worksite for help. “The woman said a man with pepper-and-salt hair in his 40s with what appeared to be a bomb duct-taped to his chest had entered the office and ordered everyone onto the floor.”

An employee of a nearby medical supply company said she was told there had been four volunteers and two full-time campaign workers in the office.

Second Update: More:

“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.

“I walked out and I immediately started running, and I saw that the road was blocked off. They told me run and keep going,” said Cassandra Hamilton, who works in an office adjacent to the building.

Nearby businesses have been evacuated, and the St. Elizabeth Seton School has been locked down.

“There are sharp shooters on the roof, and police are negotiating with someone in the building,” said another witness, who did not want to be identified. “The police are notifying all the business owners on the street to evacuate. There are fire trucks behind the Hillary Clinton office.”

Third Update: WMUR is streaming live coverage.

Fourth Update: Staffers in Barack Obama’s and John Edwards’ N.H. campaign headquarters have also been evacuated.

According to MSNBC, 2 hostages. Gunman let a mom and her infant go.

  • I can’t wait for the repercussions on our civil liberties that I don’t expect Clinton, Dodd, Biden, or Obama will stand up for –see Senate Bill 1959, “Violent Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism Prevention Act of 2007.”

  • Sadly, I suspect JKap has a point: this will likely move Clinton the right on a number of crime/terrorism/domestic security issues. The sad, sick things that happen in this country these days always seem to shock even my low and cynical expectations.

  • “Another disturbed person putting innocent people at risk—oh, well.”

    Were Cheney or Rove supposed to be in NH today?

  • I am extremely curious whether this is a disturbed person who happened to pick Clinton for the publicity; or if this is a disturbed right wing terrorist who has listened to way too much Rush & Friends.

    I am also really, really, really hoping no one gets hurt.

  • I can already hear the Right screaming bloody murder that it’s all Clinton’s fault for being “soft”.

    If she talks to him, she’s an appeaser. If she doesn’t and something happens, she’s a coldhearted bitch who made a bad tactical decision vis-a-vis a terrorist situation. In any case, this situation is going to come up every time her securty creds come up.

  • I am extremely curious whether this is a disturbed person who happened to pick Clinton for the publicity; or if this is a disturbed right wing terrorist who has listened to way too much Rush & Friends.

    While the Clinton angle makes news, statistically this is more likely the disgruntled ex (or in-the-midst-of-becoming-ex)-significant other of a staffer or volunteer working there. . .

  • #9, the flip side is you can be certain if this happened at, for example, Romney’s headquarters, the dittoheads would all be screaming about how little difference there is between our side and the terrorists.

  • Add onto my #11: And they would be doing it already, before we even find out what the guy is after.

  • That settles it for me… it appears that the Republican party has been taken over by the right wing lunatic fringe, a la Timothy McVey/abortion clinic bombers.

  • How sick is it that we are all hoping this is just a garden-variety deranged person, or an ex-husband or ex-boyfriend gone off the deep end, and not someone with a political axe to grind?

  • “How sick is it that we are all hoping this is just a garden-variety deranged person, or an ex-husband or ex-boyfriend gone off the deep end, and not someone with a political axe to grind?”

    I would think it is the opposite of ‘sick.’ The really sick thing would be if this actually turned out to be someone with a political axe to grind, thinking somehow that it is OK to act in this way.

  • I apologize for this characteristically political observation, but — what does it tell you that terrorists targeted Clinton? Who do they really fear?

    Assuming this isn’t some angry white male.

  • bubba – I guess what I was trying to convey is that the situation is terrible no matter why the guy is doing it. And I guess I felt bad hoping that this was not something that was being done for political purposes or would be exploited for same. The “sick” part for me is that if the worst happens, it won’t be any consolation that it wasn’t “personal” – it will be senseless no matter why it happens.

  • Hillary had better not meet with this guy, if that’s what he wants. It’s probably not even a real bomb, and there’s no telling what this psycho will do to her.

    There’s no reason to set a precedent of leaders meeting with hostage-takers. Any wacko with a bomb cut effectively negate an elected leaders’ entire security detail, and assassinate her just by guilting her to come talk to him before pulling the trigger. If Hillary wants to set herself up to be the butt of negative talking points for weeks, she should take a risk and go talk to this loser.

  • I wrote: “There’s no reason to set a precedent of leaders meeting with hostage-takers. Any wacko with a bomb cut. . .”

    Sorry, that was supposed to be “Any wacko with a bomb could. . .

  • Swan, setting aside the wisdom of agreeing to a hostage taker’s demands, Hillary could talk to him safely OVER A PHONE.

    Also, you’re doing these multiple revisions again. Sometimes that’s unavoidable, but it’s rarely desirable. You’ve justified multiple posts by noting that bandwidth is nearly infinite. However, your audience’s time and patience are not. Please, organize.

  • N. Wells, I’m saying if the guy tries to get Hillary to come see him in person. You could see how that’s a concern, right? He can hurt her if she is within his immediate presence.

    Also, what’s up with this “revisions” crap? Can you please not try to discourage me from posting with this? It’s really a standout that you and Zeitgeist and a few others go after me for this once in a while.

    A lot of people leave typos up there, but if a typo risks making the meaning of a post be lost, then it’s a disservice to leave it up there. Please peddle your crazy-homeless-man wisdom on a Republican website, not here.

  • swan, it is not a pointless matter. First, it does a disservie to your own thoughts when they get broken into pieces, and it makes it harder to follow. That, however, is not really my concern. It pushes other people’s posts farther down the page, where there is less likelihood they will get read, and raises the comment number to a point where people coming to a thread late may be deterred from diving in. Aside from my own personal annoyance, there are negative consequences to thread-scrolling.

  • Sometimes someone has something to add before someone else adds to the thread. It happens. Typos that could cause misunderstanding happen to slip through, sheesh.

    I’m more interested in who this guy is.

    And could someone point to me the line in SB1959 that has thought crimes in it? ‘Cause I just see funding for a committee to look at domestic terrorism – without eliminating looking at the Right’s domestic terrorists, which usually has happened in the last seven years.

  • Comments are closed.