First livestream of execution by firing squad might be scrapped — Trump and Vance aren't won over



The United States is about to make history as it prepares to televise the first-ever execution by firing squad. Former U.S. Army Major Nidal Hasan will be put to death this December for a heinous crime committed in 2009. But while the original plan was to show the event to the world, the Trump administration is locked in a debate that could take the execution off air before it even happens.

A formal execution has never been aired on TV in the United States. The most recent public execution happened in 1936 in Kentucky after Rainey Bethea raped and killed a 70-year-old woman. He was hanged for his crimes, and since the first public broadcast network didn’t arrive until several years later, the only way to witness the event was in person. Needless to say, we’re in uncharted waters.

The broadcast could be used against the United States.

Secretary of War Pete Hegseth gave the green light for the public execution, telling Jack Posobiec in an interview, “We’ll make sure that people are able to watch it, that it’s public, because people need to understand that there’s serious consequences for these types of things.”

These “things” Hegseth refers to are the 13 U.S. Army members that Hasan murdered on November 5, 2009. Hasan was later charged and convicted of 13 counts of premeditated murder and 32 counts of attempted premeditated murder. He was ultimately sentenced to death days later.

The execution will take place right back at the scene of the crime. On December 3, 2026, at 1 p.m. Central Time, Nidal Hasan will die at the hands of a firing squad. While lethal injection is usually the first option to carry out a humane death sentence, firing squads are still common in the U.S., with the latest execution taking place as recently as 2025.

The public execution of Nidal Hasan was meant to air on television and be available on streaming platforms in December. However, a new report reveals that the Trump administration is still debating the morality of putting a man to death in front of the entire world.

Vice President JD Vance has said he won't watch a livestreamed event, while Trump is reportedly cool to the streaming idea; according to ABC News, some within the administration fear that the broadcast could be used against the United States as anti-American propaganda or fuel for Islamic extremists, or that it could simply reflect poorly on the nation. The situation looks even worse considering Hasan was paralyzed during the murders in 2009, leaving him confined to a wheelchair. Visually, killing a disabled man on TV would not play well.

Despite internal discussions, the Pentagon insists that the execution will be carried out on air as planned. A list of supported TV channels and streaming services has not been finalized yet. However, some services have already pre-emptively barred the content from their platforms, including TikTok and Newsmax. Specific viewing details should be available as we get closer to the execution.

RELATED: The Fort Hood shooter is the ‘victim’ now as media compares execution to ‘lynchings’

Sara Gonzales Unfiltered

In terms of the legality of the event, the FCC has strict laws that govern the content available on TV. Specifically, stations can’t display indecent or obscene material, nor can they propagate hoaxes or distort the news. One thing dubiously absent from regulatory scrutiny is violence. Violent content is protected on TV under free speech laws. That means a public execution is technically within the FCC’s rules.

Furthermore, FCC Commissioner Brendan Carr has made no threats to get in the way. In fact, he left the final decision to air the execution to Hegseth. So as long as the Trump administration sorts out its internal disagreement, the event will be available for all to watch.

The only question now is: Should you watch it?

Legally, the death penalty is a just process sanctioned by 27 U.S. states and the federal government. At least some of biblical Scripture supports the death penalty as well. Genesis 9:6 states, “Whoever sheds human blood, by humans shall their blood be shed; for in the image of God has God made mankind." Spiritually — as in for the sake of your soul — it may be best not to tune in.

Just because the death penalty is legal and righteous doesn’t mean that it’s meant for the entire world to see. Watching someone’s life be taken siphons away a bit of one’s own soul in kind, and the spiritual trade-off isn’t worth the cost.

Without any more details, there is no way to know exactly how brutal the event will appear on TV. That said, the forceful end of a life is still a vicious death. Children definitely shouldn’t watch the event, and if you wish to protect your soul, you shouldn’t watch it either.

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Spam texts and robocalls cost Americans billions — the biggest victims are not those you suspect



Calls at 9 p.m. from an unknown number annoy everyone, even government officials.

In fact, the massive fraud being perpetuated against Americans daily is enough to pay for their commute, groceries, or even the very cell phone bill they are being scammed through.

'Twenty-five percent of the younger age group said they have been scammed more than once.'

In response to the billions being stolen every year, the Federal Communications Commission is issuing guidance.

FCC Chairman Brendan Carr has been a divisive figure over the past year, but in a move that is likely to garner bipartisan appeal, he has directed his federal agency to produce guidelines on how to fight spam calls and texts.

"As part of our ongoing efforts to crack down on illegal robocalls and text, the FCC has published step-by-step guides that enable consumers to turn on blocking and filtering tools," Carr wrote on X.

What followed was a set of government guides for learning how to block numbers, filter spam, and control who can contact a person's iPhone or Android. The guidance is also broken down into providers like AT&T, T-Mobile, and Verizon.

While these instructions may seem simple and targeted toward elderly folk, it's actually younger adults who are more susceptible to fraud campaigns.

According to the Public Interest Network's 2024 report on spam and scam, young adults ages 18 to 44 are three times as likely to be successfully targeted than those over 55 years old. Moreover, 25% of the younger age group said they have been scammed more than once.

The report stated that the reason older Americans are less likely to be victims of phone scams is because they simply aren't picking up the phone or answering a text if they don't recognize the sender.

"Fifty-seven percent have signed up for services like 'Do No Call' registry versus 30% in younger age groups (18-64 yrs)," the study explained. "Twenty-one percent of older adults have also downloaded a caller ID app or have caller ID on their landline compared to 14% in younger age groups."

RELATED: Hackers are trying to steal money from X users — don’t be one of them

Notably, males are more likely to be victims of scam calls with 79% of men admitting to such over a 12-month period versus 68% of women. Women were also more likely to ignore spam calls/texts (65%) than men are (54%), despite women receiving about 5% more spam calls than men overall and per month.

These scams reportedly effect 21% of the adult population of the United States, with an annual average loss of $450 per person and $25 billion in losses nationwide.

Location matters too. A robocall study by outlet WhistleOut revealed that robocalling frequency changes depending on the state.

Since 2020, Louisiana has seen the biggest increase in robocalls by far at 792%, which is more than a skip and a jump ahead of Mississippi's 117% increase.

Alaska, Indiana, Missouri, Oklahoma, and Kansas have all seen a 50%+ increase since 2020.

Utah has seen the biggest drop at -34%, while Nevada, Arizona, Idaho, New Jersey, Wyoming, Rhode Island, California, Colorado, and Connecticut saw decreases as well.

RELATED: Gmail is about to fill your inbox with political spam. Here's how to skip it.

ROMAIN COSTASECA/Hans Lucas/AFP/Getty Images

The FCC publishes guidance that warns of over a dozen types of scams, including collect call scams, cell phone fraud, and something called "The One Ring" scam.

The FCC also provides resources to tell Americans the laws around spam and solicitation.

The calls do not appear to be stopping either. There were about 52 billion robocalls in the United States in 2025, with that number estimated to increase to 58 billion in 2028 if current trajectories hold up.

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

The View Can’t Be Both A Neutral Newscast And A Leftist Propaganda Foghorn

Free speech protects ABC's right to run an all-left-wing panel every weekday morning. It does not entitle ABC to call that panel a news program when convenient and a protected editorial product when it is not.

Republicans want to make your cell phone better — and freer



A group of Republicans have written letters to the Federal Communications Commission asking for national changes to how consumers can use their cell phones.

On Monday, four GOP members from across the country told FCC Chairman Brendan Carr that it's time for mandatory rules that allow for greater technological freedom among cellphone providers.

'Working families and seniors on fixed incomes remain locked into carrier networks.'

Reps. Nick LaLota (R-N.Y.), Mark Alford (R-Mo.), and Mark E. Amodei (R-Nev.) wrote the FCC to voice their "strong support" behind finalizing "uniform, mandatory cellphone unlocking rules."

This would mean that when a customer is finished with a contract with his cellphone carrier, he could then have his phone unlocked so that it can be used under any other service provider/network, similar to carrying over one's phone number.

"Consumers in our districts, including working families and seniors on fixed incomes, remain locked into carrier networks even after paying off their devices, unable to switch to more affordable plans due to a patchwork of voluntary carrier policies," the congressmen wrote in a letter provided to Blaze News.

At the same time, Rep. Scott Fitzgerald (R-Wis.) wrote his own letter to Carr, which described locked phones as "artificial restrictions for consumers" that deter competition and "trap families in overpriced plans."

RELATED: Dems launch new push to control more of what you do in your car

Jc Milhet/Hans Lucas/AFP/Getty Images

Both letters cited a national poll of 1,000 registered voters on the topic of cellphone carriers locking cell phones and restricting them from being used on competing networks.

Fitzgerald cited the "extremely high" support behind being able to keep one's cell phone when changing carriers.

"Agreement is also broad and strong for the statements that locking devices to a network limits choice and is a main reason for paying," the FabrizioWard poll stated.

The other Congress members referred to the massively bipartisan nature of the idea, which was shown through 86% of independents supporting cellphone unlocking.

Concurrently, 85% of Donald Trump voters agreed, while 90% of Kamala Harris voters also were in favor of the policy.

Other major support was found when participants were asked if they should be allowed to switch cellphone carriers with the same phone at any point if they pay off the remainder of their contract; an average of 85% of respondents agreed.

RELATED: You can finally buy Palmer Luckey's favorite 'flying car' — there's just one catch

Firdous Nazir/NurPhoto/Getty Images

"We respectfully request that the commission move forward to finalize a clear and enforceable unlocking standard," the group of politicians wrote.

They continued, "Consumers seeking more affordable monthly plans may have limited options, paying higher rates than a more competitive market would require."

Without a consistent standard, they argued, consumers will continue to be treated differently depending on which carrier sold them a phone, with little recourse if they are not allowed to opt out of their contract.

The FCC has yet to respond.

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

2,500 reasons 'The View' is pure leftist propaganda — and 1 reason the FCC should leave it alone anyway



This just in from ABC: "The View" is a news program.

Yes, that’s the same “View” that traffics in more conspiracy theories than a tinfoil salesman at an Alex Jones convention.

In 2022, Goldberg claimed without evidence that the GOP planned to take select Americans’ voting rights away as well as a woman’s right to vote.

Ridiculous? Of course it is.

The surprising part isn't that ABC is saying it. It's that, for decades, the FCC has effectively treated it that way by exempting programs like "The View" from the agency's equal-time rules.

Now that long-standing interpretation is under attack — and while it's hard to argue with mocking the gynocentric gabfest's journalistic standards, the government shouldn't be deciding which shows qualify as "real" journalism.

News flush

The dispute traces back to January, when FCC Chairman Brendan Carr announced that late-night and daytime talk shows could no longer rely on a decades-old interpretation of the "bona fide news interview" exemption to the equal-time rule. Carr argued that broadcasters had stretched the exemption beyond recognition, saying legacy networks had treated their talk shows as news programs "even when motivated by purely partisan political purposes."

Congress created that exemption in 1959 after broadcasters warned that forcing equal time for every candidate interview would discourage political coverage altogether. Lawmakers ultimately concluded that preserving editorial discretion better served the public than having regulators second-guess programming decisions.

The first major test came a few weeks later. Texas Democrat Senate candidate James Talarico appeared on "The View" months before his expected primary against Rep. Jasmine Crockett (D-Texas). Under Carr's new interpretation, ABC could no longer simply assume the interview qualified for the exemption, prompting the FCC to investigate whether the appearance should have triggered equal-time obligations.

The effects were almost immediate. Citing the same regulatory uncertainty, CBS lawyers advised Stephen Colbert not to air a scheduled interview with Talarico on "The Late Show." Rather than risk an FCC dispute, Colbert released the interview on YouTube instead, where the agency has no jurisdiction. Whether you sympathize with Colbert or not, the episode demonstrated how quickly regulatory uncertainty can begin shaping editorial decisions.

Narrow 'View'

Carr's criticism wasn't pulled from thin air. The show's guest lineup is notoriously one-sided. According to the Media Research Center, last year "The View" hosted 128 liberal-leaning guests compared with just two conservatives. One of those two, actress Cheryl Hines, is generally considered "conservative" only because her husband, Robert F. Kennedy Jr., serves in the Trump administration.

The guest tally merely scratches the surface. The Media Research Center has also cataloged nearly 2,500 examples of bias, misinformation and one-sided commentary on "The View." If Carr wanted evidence that the show resembles partisan advocacy more than journalism, he hardly had to look far.

The latest examples don't require a fact-checking degree to decipher — just functioning eyes and ears (a sense of humor doesn't hurt, either).

Whoopi world

Let’s start with Whoopi Goldberg. The Oscar winner has used her “View” pulpit to suggest President Donald Trump planned to separate interracial couples. Her proof? Zip … zero … nada. Nobody tell Usha Vance, an Indian-American woman and the second lady.

That kind of commentary is disqualifying on the surface. It’s doubly damning for a verifiable “news” outlet.

More recently, Goldberg and co-host Joy Behar railed against the GOP’s SAVE Act legislation, saying it’s deeply unpopular. Or as both Goldberg and Behar said into their live mics, “nobody wants it.”

Multiple recent polls show that more than 80% of the public want voters to show ID before voting, the thrust of the legislation.

Good luck finding more than 80% of Americans to agree on, well, anything (beyond a white-hot hatred for robocalls).

That’s not just a little bit off. It’s a major embarrassment, particularly for a “news” program.

RELATED: VEEP TV: JD slays in 'View' ratings coup

Andrew Harnik/Al Drago/Getty Images

Fact-chuckers

“The View” hosts also sit silently as guests utter the most unhinged comments without a fact-check or pushback. Earlier this year, Rep. James Clyburn (D-S.C.) claimed the modern GOP was hell-bent on bringing back slavery.

The four “View” hosts couldn’t raise a single objection, nor ask the veteran Democrat to back up his outlandish claim. Would Walter Cronkite sit still while a guest uttered something so outrageous?

“And that’s the way it isn’t.”

The show’s coverage of Austin Metcalf’s shocking 2025 murder proved how dangerous — yes, dangerous — “The View’s” misinformation can be. Co-host Sunny Hostin lied about the weight disparity between Metcalf and his killer, Karmelo Anthony.

She also lied that Anthony was the only black person in the team’s tent area where the fatal stabbing occurred. Multiple black students were there at the time. Some even testified on behalf of the prosecution.

Some news program. Is it any wonder TikTok accounts repeat misinformation tied to the case?

Fake news fever

And this isn’t a recent problem. “The View” has been twisting the truth like a Bavarian pretzel for years. In 2022, Goldberg claimed without evidence that the GOP planned to take select Americans’ voting rights away as well as a woman’s right to vote.

Evidence? Proof? Hey, Goldberg starred in that adorable “Sister Act” series. That’s enough, apparently.

Two years ago, the same Goldberg said President Trump would throw Americans into camps, including gay Americans, and “disappear” them. Any update on that claim?

In other words, Carr has identified a real problem. His solution is the dangerous part.

Butt out

Treating "The View" as the equivalent of a bona fide news interview program stretches the term beyond recognition. But the government has no business deciding otherwise.

Those slopes can be mighty slippery.

The Twitter Files offered a preview of how quickly government officials can move from combatting misinformation to shaping public debate itself. The power to decide which outlets qualify as "real" journalism won't remain in the hands of today's regulators forever. Eventually it will belong to another administration with very different political priorities.

Conservatives, of all people, should understand that lesson. The power you give your friends today will eventually belong to your opponents.

More voices, not fewer. Even if some of those voices would make Cronkite spin like a top in his grave.

Kimmel’s Bromance With Disgraced Eric Swalwell Burns Out, But Pro-Dem Bias Remains

Late-night broadcast television has become a wasteland of one-party rule that is long overdue for regulatory correction.

7 People Trump Should Consider For AG With Proven Track Records Of Accountability

As the president mulls over who to replace Bondi with, there are several standout candidates.

The Media Shouldn’t Feel Threatened By The ‘Public Interest,’ But Of Course They Do

Human cheeseball and CNN content creator Brian Stelter is very concerned this week after Federal Communications Commission Chairman Brendan Carr publicly reminded TV broadcast stations that they in fact do not have a right to deliberately lie to voters using the public airwaves. Three times in as many days, Stelter has referred to a “threat” […]

Democrats erupt over Trump's weekend threats against 'fake news' media



As the Iran strikes stretch into a third week, the Trump administration has threatened legacy media outlets over their coverage of the conflict.

On Sunday, President Trump took to Truth Social to blast the legacy media for their "FAKE NEWS" coverage of the last two weeks, suggesting a degree of cooperation between some American media outlets and the Iranian propaganda machine.

'The Radical Leftwing Press knows this full well, but continues to go forward with false stories and LIES.'

"Iran has long been known as a Master of Media Manipulation and Public Relations. They are Militarily ineffective and weak, but are really good at 'feeding' the very appreciative Fake News Media false information. Now, A.I. has become another Disinformation weapon that Iran uses, quite well, considering they are being annihilated by the day," Trump wrote.

Trump gave several examples of the types of imagery and videos he claims are generated by artificial intelligence, including Iranian "Kamikaze Boats shooting at various Ships at Sea," several U.S. refueling planes having been "struck down and badly damaged," and the "USS Abraham Lincoln Aircraft Carrier, one of the largest and most prestigious Ships in the World, burning uncontrollably in the Ocean."

Trump called these stories "FAKE NEWS, generated by A.I." He further explained of the USS Abraham Lincoln: "Not only was it not burning, it was not even shot at — Iran knows better than to do that!"

RELATED: Trump demands other nations clear Strait of Hormuz, claims NATO's future at stake

Photo by Kyle Mazza/Anadolu via Getty Images

Citing two U.S. officials, the Wall Street Journal reported Friday that "five U.S. Air Force refueling planes were struck and damaged on the ground at Prince Sultan air base in Saudi Arabia." The article, which appears to have been updated on Saturday at 12:18 p.m. ET, went on to say that the tankers were "damaged but not fully destroyed."

Trump went on to suggest the severity of punishment that he believes is warranted for the "dissemination of false information": "In a certain way, you can say that those Media Outlets that generated it should be brought up on Charges for TREASON for the dissemination of false information! The fact is, Iran is being decimated, and the only battles they 'win' are those that they create through AI, and are distributed by Corrupt Media Outlets. The Radical Leftwing Press knows this full well, but continues to go forward with false stories and LIES."

Federal Communications Commission Chairman Brendan Carr made similar statements Saturday, stressing that it was time for the media to "correct course." He also reposted a previous Truth Social post from Trump insisting that "the New York Times and The Wall Street Journal (In particular), and other Lowlife 'Papers' and Media actually want us to lose the War. Their terrible reporting is the exact opposite of the actual facts!"

Carr wrote: "Broadcasters that are running hoaxes and news distortions — also known as the fake news — have a chance now to correct course before their license renewals come up. The law is clear. Broadcasters must operate in the public interest, and they will lose their licenses if they do not."

"Time for change!" he added.

Many of Trump's Democrat opponents and members of the media have since spoken out against his calls for punishing the "fake news" media.

On Friday, CNN chairman and CEO Mark Thompson issued a statement about the outlet's reporting:

We stand by our journalism. Politicians have an obvious motive for claiming that journalism which raises questions about their decisions is false. At CNN our only interest is in telling the truth to our audiences in the U.S. and around the world and no amount of political threats or insults is going to change that.

California Gov. Gavin Newsom (D) weighed in on Carr's post on Saturday: "If Trump doesn't like your coverage of the war, his FCC will pull your broadcast license. That is flagrantly unconstitutional."

Sen. Mark Kelly (D-Ariz.), who has been under fire for months over his involvement in a video encouraging military service members and intelligence personnel to "refuse illegal orders," likewise criticized the threats from the Trump administration: "When our nation is at war it is critical that the press is free to report without government interference. It is literally in the Constitution. This is overreach by the FCC because this Administration doesn’t like the microscope and doesn’t want to be held accountable."

Rep. Ted Lieu (D-Calif.) told Carr: "Take your fascist s**t and shove it."

The Wall Street Journal and the New York Times did not respond to a request for comment from Blaze News.

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

‘Fake News’: FCC Chair Warns Broadcasters To ‘Operate In The Public Interest’ Or Risk Loss Of License

'The law is clear'