cyberpunkwitch
@cyberpunkwitch.bsky.social
960 followers 740 following 2.1K posts
Math and tech nerd, sometimes software engineer, amateur artist and writer, pet mom, democratic socialist, trans lady. Please donate if you like my posts and like me and my peeps to be indoors, thanks <3. $malicemoppet
Posts Media Videos Starter Packs
Pinned
cyberpunkwitch.bsky.social
I've got bottom surgery coming up (Halloween!) and need to save up for recovery expenses
Cashapp as always is $malicemoppet
I am pretty much couch surfing right now, I have social support / people but could use cash for supplies (stuff like wet wipes, gauze etc) and bills thank you.
Reposted by cyberpunkwitch
acyn.bsky.social
AOC: And they are able to radicalize a generation of young boys in particular, away from healthy masculinity and into an insecure masculinity that requires the domination of others who are poorer, browner, darker, or a different gender than them.
Reposted by cyberpunkwitch
reichlinmelnick.bsky.social
Again, it is a full-blown federal felony crime for anyone in the White House or Executive Office of the President to order tax investigations into anyone.

And it's not just a crime to DO it, it's even a federal crime for an employee not to REPORT such an order to the Treasury Inspector General.
26 U.S. Code § 7217 - Prohibition on executive branch influence over taxpayer audits and other investigations
U.S. Code
Notes
prev | next
(a)Prohibition
It shall be unlawful for any applicable person to request, directly or indirectly, any officer or employee of the Internal Revenue Service to conduct or terminate an audit or other investigation of any particular taxpayer with respect to the tax liability of such taxpayer.

(b)Reporting requirement
Any officer or employee of the Internal Revenue Service receiving any request prohibited by subsection (a) shall report the receipt of such request to the Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration.

(c)Exceptions
Subsection (a) shall not apply to any written request made—
(1)to an applicable person by or on behalf of the taxpayer and forwarded by such applicable person to the Internal Revenue Service;
(2)by an applicable person for disclosure of return or return information under section 6103 if such request is made in accordance with the requirements of such section; or
(3)by the Secretary of the Treasury as a consequence of the implementation of a change in tax policy.
(d)Penalty
Any person who willfully violates subsection (a) or fails to report under subsection (b) shall be punished upon conviction by a fine in any amount not exceeding $5,000, or imprisonment of not more than 5 years, or both, together with the costs of prosecution.

(e)Applicable person
For purposes of this section, the term “applicable person” means—
(1)the President, the Vice President, any employee of the executive office of the President, and any employee of the executive office of the Vice President; and
(2)any individual (other than the Attorney General of the United States) serving in a position specified in section 5312 of title 5, United States Code.
Reposted by cyberpunkwitch
Reposted by cyberpunkwitch
bbkogan.bsky.social
And the craziest part is this was needless. Congress would've passed a military pay bill with near unanimous support! Congressional Ds have been begging Rs to bring a bill to pay the military to the floor! But Johnson refuses to gavel in because he doesn't want an Epstein vote.
Johnson wearing a jacket that's photoshopped to say "this has nothing to do with epstein"
Reposted by cyberpunkwitch
bbkogan.bsky.social
That is profoundly illegal. You may not spend money on a purpose without funding. The constitution expressly forbids it, as does the ADA.
Reposted by cyberpunkwitch
bbkogan.bsky.social
When money is appropriated, it's also authorized to be used only for certain activities. So if you give $50 million to the Department of Transportation to build bridges, it couldn't use that money to build airports instead.
Reposted by cyberpunkwitch
bbkogan.bsky.social
Military pay is appropriated one year at a time, with a one-year period of availability. The fiscal year ended on September 30th, and we did not pass new appropriations bills (the government is shut down), so there's no money available to pay the troops (or to do lots of things).
Reposted by cyberpunkwitch
bbkogan.bsky.social
Most money has what's called a period of availability. You can go about obligating it only during that period. While it's illegal to not use it all (that's the illegal impoundments Trump has been doing all year), after that period of availability ends, you can't use it anymore.
Reposted by cyberpunkwitch
bbkogan.bsky.social
Under the Constitution and under the ADA, it is illegal to spend money without funding for that purpose. The president may not spend money to do something unless there's actually money to carry it out and that action is expressly allowed.
https://constitution.congress.gov/browse/essay/artI-S9-C7-1/ALDE_00001095/
Reposted by cyberpunkwitch
bbkogan.bsky.social
The mechanism through which Trump is paying the troops is the most blatant large Antideficiency Act (ADA) violation in US history. It's also clearly willful. No one has been charged under the ADA before, but violations carry a two-year jail term. The statute of limitations is five years.
Reposted by cyberpunkwitch
bbkogan.bsky.social
Trump's mechanism to pay the troops during the shutdown is by far the most illegal budgetary action he's taken as POTUS, potentially setting the stage to break everything.

It's also needless because Congress would easily pass a troop pay bill if Johnson were willing to gavel in.

Long thread.
https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/2025/10/national-security-presidential-memorandum-nspm-8/
Reposted by cyberpunkwitch
cwebbonline.com
On the Charlie Kirk show, Vought said federal firings could hit “north of 10,000” during the shutdown.

Companies lay people off to survive. This is different. He sounded like he’s enjoying the chance to fast-track his agenda. This isn’t about saving money, it’s about sabotaging the government.
cyberpunkwitch.bsky.social
Robby Roadsteamer has been arrested illegally for exercising his free speech rights. The 'emergency' on which all of these supposed fascist authoritarian bullshit is based has zero evidence. It is based entirely on lies.
thetnholler.bsky.social
PORTLAND — Robby Roadsteamer grabbed by ICE for singing… 🎵
Reposted by cyberpunkwitch
davidgerard.co.uk
the way out has always been the way through

posting since 1994, not stopping until probably several months past actual death
rincewind.run
social media will always make everyone go insane except a few people who are built different

everyone thinks they’re one of those

(we, of course, are)
Reposted by cyberpunkwitch
originalsp.in
ICE arrested comedian Robby Roadsteamer for singing a parody of Rod Stewart’s “Do Ya Think I’m Sexy” in a Jeffrey Epstein the Giraffe costume outside their facility.

He sings “If you hate brown people / and you are a Nazi” and ICE thugs grab him and drag him into detention. No violence—just speech.
Reposted by cyberpunkwitch
thetnholler.bsky.social
PORTLAND — Robby Roadsteamer grabbed by ICE for singing… 🎵
cyberpunkwitch.bsky.social
Recovery supplies obtained (not from donations, nobody on blusky has spare cash in this economy, de nada, but a friend randomly bought me stuff; I'm incredibly grateful to her, I owe her after i get better).
Reposted by cyberpunkwitch
leahmcelrath.bsky.social
USAF B-52 bombers are flying in and out of the airspace near Venezuela.

This is one in a screenshot I took, but there were two others in another screenshot I saw on X:
Screenshot of Flight Radar data showing BUNNY01 flight path just north of Venezuela


BUNNY01
B52
United States - Air Force
BAD
SHREVEPORT
N/A
NOT AVAILABLE
Departed 09:38 ago
Arriving in N/A
Boeing B-52H Stratofortress
Valentin A.
BAROMETRIC ALT.
24,900 ft
GROUND SPEED
416 kts
REG 61-0010
Reposted by cyberpunkwitch
donmoyn.bsky.social
The Supreme Court simultaneously holds that:
*it is impossible for them to do anything about blatant gerrymandering
*they are entitled to dismantle, bit by bit, the landmark civil rights law of the last century
www.nytimes.com/live/2025/10...
Live Updates: Supreme Court Appears Poised to Upend Key Provision of Voting Rights Act
www.nytimes.com
cyberpunkwitch.bsky.social
It seems as though the supreme court is getting ready to strip the voting rights of various portions of the population in order to force fascist wins next election.
donmoyn.bsky.social
The Supreme Court simultaneously holds that:
*it is impossible for them to do anything about blatant gerrymandering
*they are entitled to dismantle, bit by bit, the landmark civil rights law of the last century
www.nytimes.com/live/2025/10...
Live Updates: Supreme Court Appears Poised to Upend Key Provision of Voting Rights Act
www.nytimes.com