What happens when the principal justification for your campaign is exposed as nothing more than bravado? One by one, Hillary's fraudulent claims of her first-hand, substantive experience during her tenure in the White House as First Lady, are being exposed as untrue or wildly exaggerated.
First there was the debunking of her pivotal role in the Irish Peace Accords. Next, her assertion of being a key player in passing Children's Health Care legislation was ridiculed. With the recent release of her White House schedules, it is now abundantly clear that with the exception of her calamitous role in the Health Care Task Force (which helped Republicans secure a congressional majority in 1994) and her stellar performance as head of damage control during the Monica Lewinsky scandal, she was very much a bit player during the major events of her husband's administration.
Here is an event by event sampling from The Guardian that squares Hillary’s rhetoric with reality:
That's the bad news for Hillary. The good news is that it really doesn't matter, as her rival, when it comes to substantive experience, is even more of an empty suit than she.