Alterman’s Arrest

Alterman’s Arrest

Eric Alterman, arrested in New Hampshire over whether he really belonged at a post-debate party, explains exactly what happened.

Copy Link
Facebook
X (Twitter)
Bluesky
Pocket
Email

As police took Nation columnist Eric Alterman into custody during Sunday’s Democratic debate in Manchester, New Hampshire, after a dispute over whether or not he really belonged at a post-debate party, Representative Ed Markey came over and stuck out his hand for a shake.

“Sorry, Ed, I’m being handcuffed,” said Alterman, as he reported in an article on the Huffington Post. Despite Markey’s offer to vouch for his character, Alterman was taken to headquarters, booked and released.

The arrest of the amiable but sometimes irascible columnist (full disclosure: I was his editor at MSNBC.com from 1997 to 2003) resonated in the blogosphere. Gawker and New York magazine gossip Lloyd Grove exulted. Choice placement of the news on the Drudge Report sent the conservative echo chamber into paroxysms.

Though The Nation is pleased we don’t have to send lawyers to New Hampshire to spring our columnist from jail, we thought it would be nice if he told his side of the story on our site. Worn out from all the media attention, Eric did take a minute to answer a couple of questions:

So, were you arrested for simply being yourself, or is there some larger principle at stake here?

I was arrested, as I now understand it, entirely on the basis of a misunderstanding. I was asked to leave a room. I left the room. The entire conversation that led to my arrest took place outside the room I was asked to leave.

My impression, in retrospect, is that the police officer wanted me to leave the entire building (even though I was credentialed to be there). But this was never made clear to me. I thought he was just continuing to hassle me for no reason.

When I was handcuffed and arrested, I was having a civil conversation with his commanding officer, trying to ask him to ask the guy to stop hassling me. The arresting officer, who did not actually work for the jurisdiction in question, continually interrupted my attempt at this conversation, until I finally asked him to please let me finish a sentence, at which point I was arrested.

Again, I had no idea why this was happening, since I thought the issue of my leaving the room–and again, nobody asked me not to go into that room in the first place–had long been settled.

CNN originally reported that you were “asked to leave seven times” and that you had raised your voice to the arresting officers. But the details of the arrest have changed several times on the site since then, with no editor’s note about corrections or updates. As a media watchdog, how does that strike you?

I do not think CNN should have gone with the story they did without first trying to contact me on my cell. Many people managed to reach me on my cell, and I don’t think they even tried.

There are always at least two stories to such events, usually more. In the first story, they treated the officers’ version as pure fact. In the second version, which went up after I called Atlanta and sought out the people in New Hampshire who were writing the story, they changed these details to attribute them to the police. (I did not, as I understand it, refuse any requests to leave, much less seven of them.) That should have been noted as well.

Also, I should say something about Drudge. Because this was the only story out of the debate before it ended, it went up on Drudge. The power of that man to move “news” is, as a 9-year-old I know would say, “totally awesome,” and for me, a total pain in the neck.

Support independent journalism that does not fall in line

Even before February 28, the reasons for Donald Trump’s imploding approval rating were abundantly clear: untrammeled corruption and personal enrichment to the tune of billions of dollars during an affordability crisis, a foreign policy guided only by his own derelict sense of morality, and the deployment of a murderous campaign of occupation, detention, and deportation on American streets. 

Now an undeclared, unauthorized, unpopular, and unconstitutional war of aggression against Iran has spread like wildfire through the region and into Europe. A new “forever war”—with an ever-increasing likelihood of American troops on the ground—may very well be upon us.  

As we’ve seen over and over, this administration uses lies, misdirection, and attempts to flood the zone to justify its abuses of power at home and abroad. Just as Trump, Marco Rubio, and Pete Hegseth offer erratic and contradictory rationales for the attacks on Iran, the administration is also spreading the lie that the upcoming midterm elections are under threat from noncitizens on voter rolls. When these lies go unchecked, they become the basis for further authoritarian encroachment and war. 

In these dark times, independent journalism is uniquely able to uncover the falsehoods that threaten our republic—and civilians around the world—and shine a bright light on the truth. 

The Nation’s experienced team of writers, editors, and fact-checkers understands the scale of what we’re up against and the urgency with which we have to act. That’s why we’re publishing critical reporting and analysis of the war on Iran, ICE violence at home, new forms of voter suppression emerging in the courts, and much more. 

But this journalism is possible only with your support.

This March, The Nation needs to raise $50,000 to ensure that we have the resources for reporting and analysis that sets the record straight and empowers people of conscience to organize. Will you donate today?

Ad Policy
x