Good. Now this is the last time I will ever have to think of or research Mary Tiles Texas. Banished from my memory forever.

Here is what it looks like when you click on her “joined” date.

For this to be real:

1. The UI would have had to have been temporarily showing everything.

2. The “Russia” screenshot would have needed to be taken and posted before she did.

3. Someone put a lot of effort into tiling videos.

Which is what makes me think it was a shitpost.

Third, she has a lot of TikTok style videos of her laying tile. Enough that if she was stealing someone else’s content, they would be squawking.

It could be real, but I’m over 90% on the it’s fake side.

There still is a clickable UI. It’s on the web browser version. But what it shows when you click on your own profile shows more info than when you click on someone else’s. The screenshot looks like what it does when you click on your own profile.

2. She posted the screenshot showing Russia.

Too late. It's law of the case now.

I think this screenshot is fake

Defendants were all found guilty in the state court proceedings (no double jeopardy, separate sovereigns), so even if the convictions were reversed in the federal case, it would not effect their convictions in the state case.

He's going to get stripped of his lordship for this for sure.

I kind of disappointed that we don’t have some esoteric crime from like the early 1800s of “Conspiracy to Warlord” or something. The crimes of conspiracy to murder/kidnap a foreign person and conspiracy to sexually exploit children is a little unsatisfying.

Skinny cut jeans, I assume.

Any idea on when First Monday's in October is going to release?

Your mistake is assuming that the Bronze Age Lindsey Halligan timeline is the only timeline when we are obviously in the Zero Hour: Crisis in Time timeline continuity.

Depends on the context. If I’m drafting a declaration based on the records in the file and my previous conversations with the declarant, I’m not going to spend as long going over the declaration with the declarant.

What is the charge? Eating a meal? A succulent Korean meal?

Just hold out until 1815, at which point its all down hill for France from there.

Careful Ken. This skeet has far too many words in common with this all-time classic LawTwitter tweet.

Or the judge that insisted the testifying agent said he pulled out his credenza.

For some reason, I get the feeling that you might not know which side of the opinions ruled for what. And if your opinion on the dirty laundry airing is based on the result, I think that is a bad reasoning framework.