"Two years before Ahmad Khan Rahami went on a bombing rampage in New York and New Jersey, his father told the police that the son was a terrorist..."

"... prompting a review by federal agents, according to two senior law enforcement officials."

Separately on Tuesday, another official said that when Mr. Rahami was captured during a shootout with the police, he was carrying a notebook that contained writings sympathetic to jihadist causes.

In one section of the book, which was pierced by a bullethole and covered in blood, Mr. Rahami wrote of “killing the kuffar,” or unbeliever, according to the official, who agreed to speak about the investigation only on the condition of anonymity....

What does it mean to be "Arrested Amid Gunfire" — as the front-page of the NYT has it? Who shot whom, when and why?

This isn't another Black-Live-Matter incident, but the arrest of Ahmad Khan Rahami, who — we're told — is the suspect in the Chelsea bombing. Here's the underlying article "Ahmad Khan Rahami Is Arrested in Manhattan and New Jersey Bombings" — which says "he was wounded by gunfire in an encounter with the police."

Witnesses said they saw police shoot at a man who was running away. One person who was too rattled to give his name said the victim appeared to have been shot more than once and was “still twitching.” He also said it appeared a police officer was shot.

“Lotta’ lotta’ gunfire,” said Derek Pelligra, manager of Linden Auto Body.

That's a strange way to hear the facts. Did Rahami behave aggressively toward the police or was he only running away?

Another question is whether Rahami is connected to ISIS or some other radical Islamist terrorist group. Even assuming he is responsible for the bombs, we don't know why he did it. His name doesn't answer the question, and in fact, his backstory suggests a plausible theory of a more personal sort of violent acting out.

The Rahami family runs a restaurant that has a name that seems to poignantly strive for acceptance in America: First American Fried Chicken. But residents in the neighborhood had complained about it, purportedly because it was open all hours and drew rowdy, noisy patrons who weren't above hanging around and peeing in the nearby yards and driveways. The Linden City Council passed an ordinance that would force First American Fried Chicken to close at 10, and the Rahamis resisted the law, leading to friction with the police. The Rahamis brought a lawsuit against the Council, the mayor and various police officers, charging race and ethnic discrimination.

A frequent patron of the restaurant, Ryan McCann, 33, said Ahmad Rahami was friendly and did not seem outwardly angry. Rather, Mr. McCann said, he was obsessed with fast cars, specifically Honda civics custom built to race. Mr. Rahami wore Western clothing, hung out on the sidewalk with friends and often slipped his regular customers free food, he said.

“He’s a very friendly guy; he gave me free chicken,” Mr. McCann said. “He was always the most friendly man you ever met.”...

But another neighbor, Jessica Casanova, 23, said "They seemed secretive, a little mysterious.... They’re too serious all the time." Maybe it's a sad little story about a restaurant owner who got to feeling paranoid about the people who were interfering with his business. I know, it doesn't explain schlepping the bombs to Chelsea, but as Hillary Clinton chided us when first we heard of the bombing explosion: "It’s always wiser to wait until you have information before making conclusions."

"No Tie to Global Terrorism Is Seen" headlines the NYT.

That appeared at the NYT yesterday, at the top of the front page, and you can see the time stamp: 3:20 PM.

That caught my eye because of the way the NYT, in an earlier report, blogged here, made Donald Trump seem bad for for saying "I must tell you that just before I got off the plane, a bomb went off in New York and nobody knows exactly what’s going on." The Times followed that by saying that Hillary Clinton "seemed to scold Mr. Trump for his quick assessment. 'I think it’s always wiser to wait until you have information before making conclusions,' Mrs. Clinton said." The Times omitted what Hillary said right before that: "I've been briefed about the bombings in New York and New Jersey." All we had were 2 candidates having heard about what happened and calling it a bomb. But the NYT presented it to look as though Trump was impulsive and Hillary was sober and thoughtful.

How little should it take before we jump to impugn others for "making conclusions"? If we're going to be super-sensitive, no one will escape reproach. How was it possible for the NYT to say "No Tie to Global Terrorism Is Seen" less than a day after a bomb explodes with an investigation getting underway?

Meanwhile, this morning, we're getting a new report — "Police Raid New Jersey Home in Search of Manhattan Bomber":

Hours after five pipe bombs were discovered near a train station in Elizabeth, N.J., federal agents and the police raided a home nearby early Monday morning as part of the sweeping search for the person or people responsible for Saturday night’s bombing in Manhattan.

The police released a photograph of a 28-year-old man, described as a naturalized citizen of Afghan descent, , [sic] Ahmad Khan Rahami, who is wanted in connection with the attack.

It's just a name. Just a place of origin. Remember: It’s always wiser to wait until you have information before making conclusions.

ADDED: It's dangerous to elevate Hillary Clinton for issuing the sober bromide "it’s always wiser to wait until you have information before making conclusions," because it makes me want to think of the times when she made a conclusion before she had information. For example: "We’ve seen rage and violence directed at American embassies over an awful Internet video that we had nothing to do with."