Bill Christen

I only dream of jobs offering 6 months of separation pay for a couple of years…wow. The best I’ve gotten was 10 weeks for 10 years when they decided to eliminate my position, force signing a contract that I can never go after them for anything to get the 10 weeks then see them replace me with someone cheaper weeks later.

I am reaching out to the @X community for advice with the likely risk of sharing TMI. I have been sufficiently upset about the whole matter that I have lost sleep thinking about it and I am hoping that this post will enable me to get this matter off my chest. By way of background, I started a family office called TABLE about 15 years ago and hired a friend who had previously managed a family office, and years earlier, had been my personal accountant. She is someone that I trusted implicitly and consider to be a good person. The office started small, but over the last decade, the number of personnel and the cost of the office grew massively. The growth was entirely on the operational side as the investment team has remained tiny. While my investment portfolio grew substantially, the investments I had made were almost entirely passive and TABLE simply needed to account for them and meet capital calls as they came in. While TABLE purchased additional software and other systems that were supposed to improve productivity, the team kept increasing in size at a rapid rate, and the expenses continued to grow even faster. While I would periodically question the growing expenses and high staff turnover, I stayed uninvolved with the office other than a once-a-year meeting when I briefly reviewed the operations and the financials and determined bonus compensation for the President and the CFO. I spent no time with any of the other employees or the operations. The whole idea behind TABLE was that it would handle everything other than my day job so that I would have more time for my job and my family. Over the last six years, expenses ballooned even further, employee turnover accelerated, and I became concerned that all was not well at TABLE. It was time for me to take a look at what was going on. Nearly four years ago, I recruited my nephew who had recently graduated from Harvard and put him to work at Bremont, a British watchmaker, one of my only active personal investments to figure out the issues at the company and ultimately assist in executing a turnaround. He did a superb job. When he returned from the UK late last year after a few years at Bremont, I asked him to help me figure out what was going on with TABLE. When I explained to TABLE’s president what he would be doing, she became incredibly defensive, which naturally made me more concerned. My nephew went to work by first meeting with each employee to understand their roles at the company and to learn from them what ideas they had on how things could be improved. He got an earful. Our first step in helping to turn around TABLE was a reduction in force including the president and about a third of the team, retaining excellent talent that had been desperate for new leadership. Now here is where I need your advice. All but one of the employees who were terminated acted professionally and were gracious on the way out (excluding the president who had a notice period in her contract, is currently still being paid, and with whom I have not yet had a discussion). The highest compensated terminated employee other than the president, an in-house lawyer (let’s call her Ronda), told us that three months of severance was not enough and demanded two years’ severance despite having worked at the company for only two and one half years. When I learned of Ronda's request for severance, I offered to speak with her to understand what she was thinking, but she refused to do so. A few days ago, we received a threatening letter from a Silicon Valley law firm. In the letter, Ronda’s counsel suggests that her termination is part of longstanding issues of ‘harassment and gender discrimination’ – an interesting claim in light of the fact that Ronda was in charge of workplace compliance – and that her termination was due to: “unlawful, retaliatory, and harmful conduct directed towards her. Both [Ronda] and I [Ronda’s lawyer] have spoken with you about [Ronda’s] view of what a reasonable resolution would include given the circumstances. Thus far, TABLE has refused to provide any substantive response. This letter provides the last opportunity to reach a satisfactory agreement. If we cannot do so, [Ronda] will seek all appropriate relief in a court of competent jurisdiction.” The letter goes on to explain the basis for the “unsafe work environment” claim at TABLE: “In early 2026, Pershing Square’s founder Bill Ackman installed his nephew in an unidentified role at TABLE, Ackman’s family office. [His nephew]—whose only work experience had been for TABLE where he was seconded abroad for the last four years to a UK watch company held by Ackman—began appearing at TABLE’s offices and conducting interviews of employees without a clear explanation of his role or the purposes of these interviews. During this period, he made a series of inappropriate and genderbased [sic] comments to multiple employees that created an unsafe work environment. Among other things, [his nephew] made remarks about female employees’ ages (“Tell me you are nowhere near 40”), physical appearance (“Your body does not look like you have kids”), as well as intrusive questions about family planning and sexual orientation (“Who carried your son? Who will carry your next child?”). These incidents were reported to senior leadership at TABLE and Pershing Square. Rather than being addressed appropriately, the response from senior management reflected, at best, willful blindness to the inappropriateness of [his nephew]’s remarks and, at worst, tacit endorsement.” The above allegations about my nephew had previously been brought to my attention by TABLE’s president when they occurred. When I learned of them, I told the president that I would speak to him directly and encouraged her to arrange for him to get workplace sensitivity training. The president assured me that she would do so. When I spoke to my nephew, he explained what he actually had said and how his actual remarks had been received, not at all as alleged in the legal letter from Ronda’s counsel. I have also spoken to others at the lunch table who confirmed his description of the facts. In any case, he meant no harm, was simply trying to build rapport with other employees, and no one, as far as I understand, was offended. Ironically, Ronda claims in her legal letter that TABLE didn’t take HR compliance seriously, yet Ronda was in charge of HR compliance at TABLE and the person who gave my nephew his workplace sensitivity training after the alleged incidents. In any case, Ronda, as head of compliance, should have kept a record or raised an alarm if indeed there was pervasive harassment or other such problems at the company, and there is no evidence whatsoever that this is true. So why does Ronda believe she can get me to pay her nearly $2 million, i.e., two years of severance, nearly one year of severance for each of her years at the company? Well, here is where some more background would be helpful. Over the last two months, I have been consumed with a major family medical issue – one of my older daughters had a massive brain hemorrhage on February 5th and has since been making progress on her recovery – and I am in the midst of a major transaction for my company which I am executing from a hospital room office next to her . While the latter business matter is publicly known, the details of my daughter’s situation are only known to Ronda because of her role at our family office. Now, let’s get back to the subject at hand. Unfortunately, while New York and many other states have employment-at-will, there has emerged an industry of lawyers who make a living from bringing fake gender, race, LGBTQ and other discrimination employment claims in order to extract larger severance payments for terminated employees, and it needs to stop. The fake claim system succeeds because it costs little to have a lawyer send a threatening letter and nearly all of the lawyers in this field work on contingency so there is no or minimal cash cost to bring a claim. And inevitably, nearly 100% of these claims are settled because the public relations and legal costs of defending them exceed the dollar cost of the settlement. The claims are nearly always settled with a confidentiality agreement where the employee who asserts the fake claims remains anonymous and as a result, there is no reputational cost to bringing false claims. The consequences of this sleazy system (let’s call it ‘the System’) are the increased costs of doing business which is a tax on the economy and society. There are other more serious problems due to the System. Unfortunately, the existence of an industry of plaintiff firms and terminated employees willing to make these claims makes it riskier for companies to hire employees from a protected class, i.e., LGBTQ, seniors, women, people of color etc. because it is that much more reputationally damaging and expensive to be accused of racism, sexism, and/or intolerance for sexual diversity than for firing a white male as juries generally have less sympathy for white males. The System therefore increases the risk of discrimination rather than reducing it, and the people bringing these fake claims are thereby causing enormous harm to the other members of these protected classes. So what happened here? Ronda was vastly overpaid and overqualified for the job that she did at TABLE. She was paid $1.05 million plus benefits last year for her work which was largely comprised of filling out subscription agreements and overseeing an outside law firm on closing passive investments in funds and in private and venture stage companies, some compliance work, and managing the office move from one office to another. She had a very good gig as she was highly paid, only had to go into the office three days a week, and could work from anywhere during the summer. Once my nephew showed up and started to investigate what was going on, she likely concluded that there was a reasonable possibility she would be terminated, as her job was in the too-easy-and-to-good-to-be-true category. The problem was that she was not in a protected class due to her race, age or sexual identity so she had to construct the basis for a claim. While she is female and could in theory bring a gender-based discrimination claim, she reported to the president who is female and to whom she is very close, which makes it difficult for her to bring a harassment claim against her former boss. When my nephew complimented a TABLE employee at lunch about how young she looked – in response to saying she was going to her 40-year-old sister’s birthday party, he said ‘she must be your older sister’ – Ronda immediately reported it to our external HR lawyer. She thereby began building her case. The other problem for Ronda bringing a claim is that she was terminated alongside 30% of other TABLE employees as part of a restructuring so it is very difficult for her to say that she was targeted in her termination or was retaliated against. TABLE is now hiring an external fractional general counsel as that is all the company needs to process the relatively limited amount of legal work we do internally. In short, Ronda was eminently qualified and capable and did her job. She was just too much horsepower for what is largely an administrative legal role so she had to come up with something else to bring a claim. Now Ronda knew I was a good target and it was a good time to bring a claim against me. She also knew that I was under a lot of pressure because on March 4th when Ronda was terminated, my daughter had not yet emerged from consciousness, she was not yet breathing on her own, and my daughter and we were fighting for her life. I was and remain deeply engaged in her recovery while at the same time I was working on finishing the closing for the private placement round for my upcoming IPO. Ronda also knew that publicity about supposed gender discrimination and a “hostile and unsafe work environment” are not things that a CEO of a company about to go public wants to have released into the media. And she may have thought that the nearly $2 million she was asking for would be considered small in the context of the reputational damage a lawsuit could cause, regardless of the fact that two years of severance was an absurd amount for an employee who had only worked at TABLE for 30 months. She also likely considered that I wouldn’t want to embarrass my nephew by dragging him into the klieg lights when her claims emerged publicly. So, in summary, game theory would say that I would certainly settle this case, for why would I risk negative publicity at a time when I was preparing our company to go public and also risk embarrassing my nephew. Notably, she hired a Silicon Valley law firm, rather than a typical NY employment firm. This struck me as interesting as her husband works for one of the most prominent Silicon Valley venture firms whose CEO, I am sure, has no tolerance for these kinds of fake claims that sadly many venture-backed companies also have to deal with. I mention this as I suspect her husband likely has been working with her on the strategy for squeezing me as, in addition to being a computer scientist, he is a game theorist. My only advice for him is to understand more about your opponent before you launch your first move. All of the above said, gender, race, LGBTQ and other such discrimination is a real thing. Many people have been harmed and deserve compensation for this discrimination, and these companies and individuals should be punished for engaging in such behavior. Which brings me to the advice I am seeking from the X community. I am not planning to follow the typical path and settle this ‘claim.’ Rather, I am going to fight this nonsense to the end of the earth in the hope that it inspires other CEOs to do the same so we shut down this despicable behavior that is a large tax on society, employment, and the economy and contributes to workplace discrimination rather than reducing it. Do you agree or disagree that this is the right approach?

@CynicalPublius @RealRawNews1 Thankful for community notes so I can block accounts that exist for fakes and lies.

@RealRawNews1 You should be ashamed of yourself. People will believe this. Delete it.

Per source, the US Army Criminal Investigation Division has detained former Army Chief of Staff Gen. Randy George, whom Hegseth fired yesterday, based on suspicion of treason. More when we have more info.

@ApexJones22 Simple, DEI

Somebody in the comments said Disney never misses an opportunity to miss an opportunity

@arkadiybe @biancoresearch Nor should they want to use this style offensively because it'll provoke an overwhelming response to make it stop eventually. If every kitchen is a munition factory, then it's all a valid target.

Two things. 1. The drones are cheap because they are made from cheap Chinese parts. Cut the Chinese parts and the drones are gone. Those parts are not made in small workshops. They are made in huge factories. These factories are huge because that's required for the efficiency. Destroy the factories and the drones will disappear. (Oh, and are the parts that cheap? Or are they dumped and subsidized?) 2. If every kitchen is a munition factory, then every power plant, water tower and sewage processing station is a valid military target. Be very careful with that notion. You really don't want to go there.

I am not a military analyst. I'm a financial analyst focused on macroeconomic risk. That different lens might explain why I see something most military strategists and investors are missing. --- The New Rules of Warfare—And Why We Can't Opt Out For nearly a century, warfare belonged to whoever controlled the biggest defense budget. Aircraft carriers. Stealth bombers. Multibillion-dollar weapons systems. That model is changing in ways many aren't appreciating. Ukraine and Iran are showing the West what 21st-century conflict actually looks like: decentralized, highly iterative, fast-changing, unmanned, and cheap. Neither the US nor Russia—beginning in 2022—appears prepared. We might now have no choice but to show we can fight and win such a war. The Ukraine Approach Faced with a small defense budget, a much smaller population, and a vastly outnumbered army, Ukraine had to get creative. They couldn't match Russia's industrial capacity or spending. So they abandoned that playbook entirely. They developed an entirely new way to fight, highly decentralized, iterative, and most importantly, cheap. They also created Brave1—a completely new way to conduct war. Frontline commanders log into an iPad and bypass central command entirely. They spend digital points to purchase equipment directly from hundreds of (Ukrainian) manufacturers. When they encounter a new threat, they message the manufacturer directly and work with the engineers to find a solution, even if that means they visit to the front. The result is hardware or software upgrades that once took months now take days. Here's the crucial part: hundreds of manufacturers compete fiercely for these dollars by offering the best possible product as fast as possible. This isn't centralized procurement. It's a market. Competition drives innovation at scale. Weapons evolve as the enemy evolves in real time. Units are also awarded points for confirmed kills, uploaded from drone video—a powerfully eloquent way to grade effectiveness. But the real innovation might be how they decentralized manufacturing itself. Instead of building weapons in massive, centralized factories that make perfect targets for Russian bombing, Ukraine distributed production across hundreds of small manufacturers—workshops, machine shops, garages, and yes, kitchens. Each produces components or complete systems. This approach serves two purposes: speed and survival. You can bomb a tank factory. You destroy production for months. You cannot bomb ten thousand kitchens. If one workshop gets hit, ninety-nine others keep producing. The network regenerates faster than Russia can destroy it. This is why the manufacturing process includes actual kitchens—it's not a metaphor. It's a strategy. The Metric That Defines a New Era The result is staggering: at least 70% of battlefield casualties now come from drones. This is the first time in over a century that the primary cause of combat death is neither a bullet nor an artillery shell. Since World War I, industrial warfare meant industrial killing. Ukraine has broken that equation entirely. As a result, Russia is now controlling less territory than at any point since 2022 and going backward. In March, Ukraine made gains while Russia recorded no gains for the first time in two and a half years, and Drone-led offensives recaptured 470 square kilometers while paralyzing 40% of Russian oil exports. Ukraine has lowered the "cost per kill" to less than $1,000 per casualty—a 99.98% reduction from the millions of dollars that were common in the post-9/11 wars. This isn't an incremental improvement. This is a complete inversion of modern military economics. Yet the Western defense establishment is not learning from this. Rheinmetall CEO Armin Papperger mocked Ukraine's entire approach. In The Atlantic, he called Ukrainian manufacturers "housewives with 3D printers," dismissing their work as "playing with Legos." They are not studying this revolution. They are mocking it. And the "housewives with 3D printers" are beating the Russian army! Ukraine Is Now in the Middle East The US Military and Gulf states face an eerily similar problem. Iran's Shahed drones threaten shipping in the Strait of Hormuz—a chokepoint that funnels 21% of global oil. They cannot fend off Iran by firing a $4 million Patriot missiles at $20,000 drones. They need what Ukraine has discovered: a decentralized, rapidly adaptive defense network that doesn't require centralized industrial capacity. That's why Ukraine just signed historic 10-year defense deals with Saudi Arabia, Qatar, and the UAE. Over 220 Ukrainian specialists are now on the front lines of the Persian Gulf—exporting not just weapons, but a completely new doctrine of how to fight. The precedent is set. The model works. Everyone is watching. Mosaic On April 1st, Trump threatened to bomb Iran "back to the stone ages" if they don't reopen the Strait within weeks. It's the classic 20th-century playbook: overwhelming offense force, massive bombardment, industrial-scale destruction. The problem? That playbook doesn't work against distributed, cheap, rapid-iteration systems—especially when your enemy is organized under a mosaic structure. Iran's "Mosaic Defense" doctrine is a decentralized command system where authority and capability are distributed across multiple geographic and organizational nodes. Each region operates semi-autonomously with overlapping chains of command and pre-planned contingencies. It's designed so that when you destroy the center, the edges keep fighting. You cannot decapitate a system with no head. You cannot out-bomb your way to victory when your enemy is not centralized; this was the solution for 20th-century industrial warfare. Defense Wins Championships 21st-century asymmetrical threats require defensive shields, not aggressive offenses. Ukraine has built exactly that: rapid-iteration defenses, decentralized manufacturing, commanders empowered to buy solutions in real time and rewarded for success. That same defensive model may hold the key to opening the Strait of Hormuz. Not through massive offense, but through the ability to adapt and defend quickly. Why We're Stuck Whether you viewed this as a war of choice or not, it has now become a war to keep global trade open. And that makes it inescapable. This is precisely why the US cannot declare victory and walk away from the Strait of Hormuz— or TACO. Every adversary on the planet will interpret American withdrawal as confirmation that cheap asymmetric systems work against powerful centralized platforms. And these adversaries might have sent us a message last month. In mid-March 2026, an unauthorized drone swarm penetrated Barksdale Air Force Base in Louisiana, home to the U.S. Air Force's Global Strike Command. The fact that this happened not overseas but in the United States, and that these tests occurred just weeks ago, underscores how close this threat is now. They didn't attack. They announced their presence. Every adversary watching learned that cheap drone networks can reach into the US. The Global Supply Chain Risk If the US abandons the Gulf while Iran holds the Strait contested, markets will price this as validation that cheap systems can hold global trade hostage. The current market disruptions will become permanent. Supply chains will have to pivot from "just-in-time" efficiency back to "just-in-case" redundancy. Inflation returns as safety costs money. Trade routes diversify away from vulnerable chokepoints. The global friction tax becomes permanent. The Unavoidable Truth Once you prove that cheap, asymmetric systems can hold global trade hostage, that knowledge spreads globally and irreversibly. Every adversary learns the same lesson: you don't need a $2 trillion Navy—you need $20 million in drones and the will to use them. Withdrawing while the Strait remains contested would permanently validate this model. Supply chains shift to "just-in-case" redundancy. Insurance costs rise. The friction tax becomes structural—baked into every global transaction for decades. The cost of staying is measured in months. The cost of leaving is measured in decades of economic drag. We cannot leave unfinished business.

@CJGRISHAM Damn nice shirt.

Got my custom shirt in.

To Dan, as a lifelong Republican and Texan, No, we just despise you utterly for being an evil, lying, backstabbing, rude, arrogant, two-faced, jackass. Thank you for your service, now sit down and shut up as a normal civilian who no longer has an oz of authority other than your right to vote. Arrogant ass. Oh, and I do still vote for Cruz despite him imperfect.

So Dan Crenshaw is claiming Ted Cruz donors and influencers lined up to take him out because he might challenge Cruz? No. I’m in Texas. Grassroots are picking off incumbents they don’t like. No conspiracy needed. Dan is unpopular. That’s not a setup.

@MagaSgt One of these days, silly cops with guns and special legal protections to use them will stop trying to provoke a response from law abiding citizens so they can get their kicks by being thugs and illegally detaining people on fishing expedition power trips.

One of these days, silly people will stop trying to provoke a response from law enforcement, just so they can get their kicks by saying ‘articulable’, which is hard to articulate 🤣

@PoliceThePolic1 Well the text of your post is wholly inaccurate. The incident sure doesn’t need exaggeration to behorrifying. Plz fix, thx.

Cop unloads rounds at an innocent man on the freeway, spraying bullets across traffic like everyone else’s life is collateral — then immediately shifts into apology mode.

Oh Travis:) The police are prohibited by law from stopping someone with a firearm just to check if they legally are ok, or are prohibited from having a firearm, reasonable articulable suspicion of you actively comiitting a crime or being wanted for a warrant is required and carrying the firearm is not allowed to be that suspicion, by law, specifically to prevent this cops’ behavior. The cop was more than just wrong in this encounter, he was acting outside and against the law saying he was detaining for some kind of gun/id check. How does the cop know you don’t have a bag of cocain up your butt, Travis? I mean what if he needs to check to make sure you don’t?

@CJGRISHAM You do realize you gave him the answer to hold you. How dose he know you are aloud to have a gun unless he checks who you are. So until he can make sure you legall7 have the gun and have no felonies you should have been detained. That is legal.

One of these days, cops will stop fucking with gun owners, especially 2A attorneys. Until then, I'll keep standing up to them.

@Polymarket Nice zoom level.

BREAKING: Gold & silver prices collapse.

Last night at the ball field, I saw a guy wearing an EBITDA shirt. Naturally, I had to ask him what he does for work…

Would be such a lovely world if all court fees and expenses and everything were covered for everyone charged of crimes. Not even including the lawyers cost to end up there excluding the idea id making a profit and living. Reality is, legal defense costs money. Appeals cost money. The state makes you pay that money. These days even not-guilty verdicts can end up with the innocent party having to pay court fees. See Afroman for a recent one. You think lawyers have money laying around to pay all those bills for everyone that needs their defense and support their family by doing cases pro bono? Thatnwould be delusional. Most lawyers are not wealthy or rich by anyone’s definition.

@CJGRISHAM Why don’t you do it pro bono?

Friends, my client deserves an appeal, but they are expensive. I'm doing this at a discount to hold APD accountable. We have two points of appeal in my view: evidence is insufficient to support a conviction and statute is unconstitutionally broad as applied. We can't wait another 18 months for the legislature to fix this (if they even have the spine to do this). We must challenge it in the courts NOW. He has created a GiveSendGo to raise the money, but I only have 9 days left to file a notice of appeal. If we can get him at least halfway there, I'll file the notice and get started, which then gives him 45 days to raise the rest and me 45 days to appeal. v2.givesendgo.com/RichardsonAppe…

@Watchdog_57x28 @CJGRISHAM Go. Fuck. Yourself.

@CJGRISHAM Lawyers are the worst... "you deserve to be free, but you can't pay me, so f you"... That's what you just said.

@ComradeNixcea @Bob46753559 @Chicanatravels And then work their asses off helping building this country. Same as every family that came from Europe. Legal is legal. Illegal is illegal. You can’t make one the other with emotions.

@Bob46753559 @Chicanatravels In 1975 you didn’t have to wait 8 years to get citizenship. It also was significantly cheaper, my family immigrated from Germany in the late 20s. You know what the had to do in order to gain citizenship? Step off the boat and take an English literacy test.

Born to two illegals in 1975… next time you want to take MY 🇺🇸 CITIZENSHIP…. Come with your 20 plus years DD214.

This is the kind of person and family I applaud and respect. I respect massively both parts individually, the doing it legally and right and the service. There are no valid excuses for those doing it illegally, but they will offer them, always claiming “but, we have it harder or something similar”. Thing is, no excuses ever can or will come close to “We did it legally and served”. That’s a foundation to build a legacy on.

@Chicanatravels I came here legally and so did my parents. We all served in the United States Marine Corps. What makes you better than my family who did it right in 1975?

@MrLeadslinger @Kronykal 100% this.

@Kronykal The crowd at the malls changed.

Why did people stop going to indoor malls? Is it Amazon? Going to the mall and hanging out for hours was half the 80s. It was friggin awesome.

@RepLuna @realannapaulina Except it’s not. There is a significant percentage of Americans that want to destroy America as it is and was. And a bigger percentage that are so ignorant they don’t care and won’t vote.

At this rate, it’s not even about being a Democrat or Republican anymore. It’s literally the American people versus a uniparty establishment that is corrupt to the core. It’s time for voters to wake up when they go to vote on Election Day. Stop sending the same garbage to the Senate.

A church cross is just a symbol. It’s not a shrine, a home, an artifact or anything more than a couple pieces of wood meant to convey a reminder. It’s replaceable for a few dollars if destroyed. God doesn’t reside there any more than he is everywhere. God has no need of any sacred places. Disrespecting a culture you’re visiting like that is still wrong and that person should be shamed for it. But, your comparison to a church cross is way off.

@26ers_bp115 Would you do the same thing by hanging from a church cross in your country? For Japanese people, Shinto shrines are dwelling places of gods, sacred places. Please show respect to the objects of worship in your own country, in accordance with your own religion.

世界の皆さんへ 日本の神社は聖域です。 神社にある鳥居は鉄棒ではありません。 このような行為は日本人が最も嫌います。 絶対にやめて下さい。

@cjblain10 They coulda filled that spot with a career IT guy with no law degree or degree at all and he’d do way better than this judge.

Remember Nathan the next time someone wants to criticize Cindy/HCRP for not filling every last spot on the judicial ballot by recruiting any rando with a law degree

@dotdotslashstar @DuBoseDefense Hostile workplace lawsuit incoming.

Judge Milliron had some kind of fight with the District Clerk's Office where IIUC he declared everyone assigned to him to be incompetent and then got upset that no one wanted to fill his empty clerk position. Even if he was right to expect more, his emails were nasty.

It gets worse. This weekend after seeing the video, a veteran criminal defense lawyer (with no cases in this guy’s civil court) wrote this judge an email telling the judge he needed to apologize. The judge responded by accusing the lawyer of making an ex parte communication and ordered him to appear next week under threat of contempt. I’m a member of the Harris County Criminal Lawyers Association “Strike Force,” a group of several lawyers tasked with defending lawyers against judicial overreach at a moment’s notice. We’ll be there to make sure this judge does not try to jail a veteran lawyer just for exercising his First Amendment rights in criticizing an elected judge’s behavior.