Besides Donald Trump, I don't know if there was an account on all of Twitter that epitomized pure right-wing ugliness more than Juanita Broaddrick.
For those unfamiliar, Broaddrick's main claim to fame is that during the height of the Clinton-Lewinsky impeachment saga around 1998, she claimed that Bill Clinton sexually assaulted her back in the 1970s. And while any woman claiming sexual assault deserves the right to have their claims heard by the public (and she most definitely did that), it soon became clear that Broaddrick's story had some serious issues concerning its credibility. Beyond the lack of any contemporaneous evidence, her story read like a bad Lifetime Movie more than a believable claim of rape. It left more questions than answers, like the fact that Broaddrick actually hosted a fundraiser for Clinton just a couple of weeks after the day she would later claim the assault took place. But most problematic was the fact that she actually executed a sworn affidavit denying that she was ever sexually assaulted by Clinton, which she has never bothered to retract in any subsequent testimony.
Broaddrick's story was ultimately so useless and full of holes, Ken Starr had no use for her during his investigation of Clinton. Ken Starr--a man so determined to bring Clinton down over the slightest foible. Think about that for a moment.
Anyways, Twitter came, and Broaddrick's feed wasn't just a screed against the Clintons, but against any and all Democrats and left leaning political figures in general.
But raw partisanship is one thing; gross hypocrisy is quite another. And that's where Broaddrick was the absolute worst.
Broaddrick--who made her bread and butter her claims that she was sexually assaulted by a powerful political figure--was very quick to jump to the defense of other powerful political figures accused of sexual misconduct...so long as they were conservative Republicans. So when Roy Moore was accused of inappropriate behavior regarding underaged teenagers, Broaddrick was quick to his defense without a second question.
And when the "Access Hollywood" tapes emerged during the 2016 campaign where Donald Trump was bragging about his desire for women to "grab them by the pussy," Broaddrick within days appeared at a pre-debate event literally sitting next to Trump and defending him vehemently. And she always supported Trump vocally, through every single accusation of sexual impropriety on his part.
But the worst would have to be her spirited support of then-Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh, and her below-the-belt attacks against Kavanaugh's accuser Christine Blasey Ford. Broaddrick immediately branded Ford a liar, denied she could have even possibly been telling the truth, and even mocked Ford's physical appearance and testimony mannerisms during the Senate hearings. Mind you, Ford did what Broaddrick never could do--testify under oath that she was sexually assaulted. A genuine and credible Broaddrick might have painted Ford as a kindred spirit regardless of politics.
But Broaddrick was neither genuine nor credible. She was a hypocritical and hateful hack, and she does not deserve anyone's support or lent credibility.
She made crude comments about Michelle Obama and other figures who never caused her the slightest bit of harm. She reposted White Supremacists, spread lies about COVID and vaccines, and engaged in Q-Anon conspiracy theories (even appearing at Q-Anon conferences).
Apparently in the end, it was a homophobic remark--referring to gays as "the rainbow people" and how she was "sick and tired of having their lifestyle crammed down our throats on a daily basis"--that did her in.
Good riddance to human rubbish. Truly an awful person on all levels.
Enjoy Truth Social, you bitch.