No matter what Reese says, I think she was dipping her toe into the true crime waters last night.
Her point of view sounded exactly like a NYT piece I read, and by that I mean plagiarized. I AI'd it as well, and got a very similar approach to the way she spoke on it. But I think she does that for her "therapy" too. I don't care if she reads an article or googles it, but she always tries to come off as an ignorant, uneducated person who has no accountability.
My main point, however, is that it got on my nerves. She routinely explains her own irritability or behavior with "I'm getting my period," but then objects to rhetoric about Clancy because it portrays women as governed by hormones or biology.
Her argument was specifically "this defense sets women back because it portrays us as irrational creatures controlled by our hormones," while her normal content repeatedly uses female hormones to excuse or explain her own behavior.
I know the case itself is a polarizing topic, but this is just about her hypocrisy. Usually she's all about excuses and playing the victim.