The fact that the Google Account pic in the top right of the page (not browser) is censored is very suspicious. If this was indeed Aaron's history it would show Aaron's logo no matter who else is logged into this browser, as that's the active account.
Why not take it one step further for a moment: because of the conspicuously unnecessary redactions there is precisely
nothing within the four corners of the tweeted screenshot inconsistent with a scenario in which Nick created a burner account along the lines of
ThisOughtaOwnThaHaydurz@Gmail.com, logged into it, created the depicted browsing history and screenshotted it, added the redactions and any other shoops that make it look like the screenshot
could have been taken while logged into Aaron's account when he can prove it was not, logged out from (if not also deleted) the burner account, waited until the time when he
thought (perhaps mistakenly) that Google's applicable retention policy would remove any trace of him having ever used that burner account, and posted the screenshot claiming it was made while logged into Aaron's account. In that hypothetical scenario, whatever search warrants his actions will have instigated would not turn up forensic evidence of him having ever actually accessed Aaron's account at all.
What would such a strategy achieve, in his mind? I can think of a few things, but does it really matter? We're talking about such an absurd cocktail of cocaine, booze, brain damage, and mental illness that it doesn't really matter what he
thought it would achieve. All that matters is it would likely blow up in his self-raking face as per usual, so alls we have to do is break out the popcorn, point, and laugh. The rest is in the warrant-issuing judge's hands.