I don't know all the facts about her resigning, but why would she be using state resources if she personally was being sued? That seems like a misuse of state resources. As for the Revere thing, the facts support that he warned the British, but not in the way she said. The gunshots and bells were to warn the colonist. Or is she saying that Revere was riding to warn the British that the colonist were ready to fight? She implies that Revere was either warning the British that the colonist were going to fight them or that the British couldn't easily disarm the colonist, during his ride. He only did what she says after being captured, and held at gun point. So yes, she did get Paul Revere's story wrong, despite people trying to spin it otherwise. He did not set out and ride around the warn the British, and if he did he was a traitor up there with Benedict Arnold. So is she getting her facts wrong, or invoking the name of a traitor to our nation?