During a discussion about various potential presidential candidates' reactions to the then-forthcoming speech by President Bush on the January 10 edition of MSNBC's Hardball, political and social commentator Mike Barnicle falsely claimed that Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-NY) “hasn't said a thing about [Iraq] in months” and that "[i]t is amazing that she's been able to get away with what she's gotten away with. Saying nothing." In fact, in the past two months, Clinton has issued several statements regarding the American mission in Iraq.

Barnicle prefaced his false statement about Clinton by asking: “Does she know where Iraq is?”

On December 6, Clinton issued a statement after the release of the Iraq Study Group report in which she said that the report demonstrated “the growing bipartisan consensus that we need a dramatic change of course in Iraq, including a redeployment of American troops.” At a Senate Armed Services Committee hearing on December 7, while questioning James Baker and Lee Hamilton, co-chairmen of the Iraq Study Group, Clinton made the following statement:

As I listen to you and as I reviewed the report, I'm basically hearing two overriding suggestions: one, that we have to engender the will and assist the capacity of the Iraqi government to take the political and economic actions necessary to stabilize itself. And our biggest stick in order to do that is to make it clear we are not there unconditionally. We are not going to be baby-sitting a civil war. We are not going to take sides in sectarian violence.

Additionally, as the Associated Press reported on December 18, Clinton said “she was not in favor of a proposed 'surge' of some 20,000-40,000 American troops into Baghdad to quell the sectarian violence there." That report quoted several of Clinton's statements earlier that day on NBC's Today:

“I am not in favor of doing that unless it's part of a larger plan,” Clinton, D-New York, said in an interview on NBC's “Today” show. “I am not in favor of sending more troops to continue what our men and women have been told to do with the government of Iraq pulling the rug out from under them when they actually go after some of the bad guys.”

During the discussion, Matthews stated: “How does Hillary hide, then? She seems to be hiding tonight already. It's a little early to say she's hiding, but I've seen no evidence that she's issued a statement to a speech that's already pretty much public record now.” Immediately following the president's January 10 speech, Clinton issued a statement that said "[b]ased on the President's speech tonight, I cannot support his proposed escalation of the war in Iraq."

From the January 10 edition of MSNBC's Hardball with Chris Matthews at 7 p.m. ET:

MATTHEWS: Is it a Republican war and they're stuck with it, they might as well get in line? Elephant behind elephant for this war position tonight.

BARNICLE: Well, I think there's that, Chris, but also, even on the other side. Even [former Sen.] John Edwards [D-NC], [Sen.] Chris Dodd [D-CT], [Sen.] Joe Biden [D-DE], all of them running for president. They are going to be asked when they're out there in Iowa, in New Hampshire, or anywhere in this country within the next six months, one of two questions. How could you have gone along with this guy on this scheme? Or, hey, things are looking up in Iraq. Now, the betting is that it's going to be the first question they're going to be asked, and they're going to have to have an answer for that. Because Iraq is going to be the front-burner issue in '08.

MATTHEWS: How does Hillary hide, then? She seems to be hiding tonight already. It's a little early to say she's hiding, but I've seen no evidence that she's issued a statement to a speech that's already pretty much public record now.

BARNICLE: Does she know where Iraq is? She hasn't said anything about it in months. She hasn't said a thing about it in months. It is amazing that she's been able to get away with what she's gotten away with. Saying nothing.

MATTHEWS: Does her silence imply support for the war?

BARNICLE: I think her silence implies the fact that she is so solidified into the mechanics of a campaign, rather than the emotion of a campaign, that she's forgotten what it's like to run for president of the United States -- when her husband ran for president and she didn't. But she's so involved in the mechanics and the consultancies around her candidacy that she's forgotten that this war has driven this country with great emotion. The president of the United States has lost the country on this war. And if she remains silent, she's going to lose a good chunk of her support for presidency.