Re 1:
As pertains to *facts*, she clearly was an untrustworthy source. She claimed to be (in whole, by the way) an "American Indian." That is false, notwithstanding what she may or may not have believed. Wouldn't you call a MAGA Trumpster who *believed* Climate Change was a Chinese hoax an untrustworthy source of information?

2:
She needn't necessarily be lying now. I'll grant you that she might have "thought" she had significant Native American ancestry before (notwithstanding the fact that filling out "American Indian" as your race is not equivalent to saying, "I have significant Native American ancestry). But let's assume that's true. That what she meant by claiming she was an "American Indian" was that she "had significant Native American ancestry." Fine. The claim was still false. IOW, her belief did not align with reality. The same could be true in this latest case. She could have misinterpreted something Bernie said. If so, she's not "lying" in this case anymore than she was "lying" in the previous case.