D-Minus Diaries Podcast

About D-Minus Diaries Podcast

Life changes one small step at a time. Sometimes we walk alone, sometimes with others, and sometimes we feel completely lost in a crowded room. But no matter where we stand, our stories matter — yours and mine. And somewhere between them is the truth we’re all trying to figure out. The D-Minus Diaries is a place for anyone learning, stumbling, rebuilding, or pushing forward when life refuses to give clear instructions. No topic is off limits. We talk about self-reliance, critical thinking, forgiveness, humor, failure, resilience, how politics shapes us, getting screwed over, and the life lessons that show up uninvited. Some stories are funny, some sting, and some remind us how thin the line is between chaos and clarity. I share experiences from an adopted kid in the Appalachian mountains with a D-minus average who went from bag boy to the Coast Guard, to Special Forces, to decades as a senior civil servant supporting America’s most elite units and its veterans. This podcast isn’t just about where I’ve been. It’s about where you’re going. New episodes weekly. Best enjoyed while driving. If you want it even shorter or punchier, I can cut it down again. dminusdiaries.substack.com (https://dminusdiaries.substack.com?utm_medium=podcast)

Publisher

Jim Jones Writes

Category

news · society & culture

Language

en

Explicit

No

First episode

9 Dec 2025

Latest episode

16 Oct 2026

Latest episodes

50 episodes in the feed.

1. 

   16 Oct 2026

   By Order of the President

   By Jim Jones I am going to start off with a philosophical question. We say we are a country of laws. In the military you take an oath where actions have consequences. Whether it is a civilian courtroom or military courts-martial if the act is so horrible and the death penalty is given but not executed, have we not undermined the whole process? In a country where half of the people hate what the other half thinks, it is hard to find peace. Last week it was about a botched execution in Tennessee. This week is about a military officer who by definition became a traitor when he killed his fellow soldiers and military civilian. He was also a doctor who broke his oath “to do no harm”. He was tried, convicted, and sentenced to death by a military court-martial. Once President Trump approved his execution, the Secretary of War said it would be public, which caused outrage among many people. It is my observation that some of the same people in the media and on social media who cheered when President Trump and Charlie Kirk were shot are now outraged by the idea that a murderer would be executed by a firing squad. Unlike the civilian justice system, the military operates under a different court system, where punishments are often harsh. Those punishments are based in law. In 2011, President Barack Obama reportedly made a startling observation about his administration’s counterterrorism operations. According to the 2013 book Double Down, Obama told advisers, “Turns out I’m really good at killing people.” The remark reportedly came on the same day a U.S. drone strike killed Anwar al-Awlaki, an American citizen, in Yemen. His administration had deliberately targeted an American citizen for death without a criminal trial. Meanwhile, Hasan, who murdered his fellow Americans at Fort Hood, was prosecuted for murder rather than terrorism. Under the Obama administration, it was acceptable to target an American citizen overseas as a terrorist, without a trial, but when an Army major opened fire on his fellow soldiers at home, the Pentagon called it “workplace violence”? The first soldier executed after a court-martial in George Washington’s Continental Army was Thomas Hickey, a member of Washington’s own guard. A general court-martial convicted him on June 26, 1776, of mutiny, sedition, and treacherous correspondence with the enemy. The next day Washington approved the sentence in his general orders and directed that Hickey be hanged at eleven o’clock the following morning. On June 28, near the Bowery then a rural area on the outskirts of New York City, Hickey was publicly hanged before an estimated 20,000 soldiers and civilians. Washington said he hoped Hickey’s fate would be “a warning to every soldier in the Army.” From the Commanding General of the Continental Army to the President of the United States, the authority to approve military executions has rested with the nation’s highest military leadership. With the stroke of a pen, he could spare a man’s life or allow the military to take it. No matter how many generals, lawyers, politicians, or polls weighed in, the final decision in those cases rested with the President of the United States. Here we are, more than 250 years later, preparing to witness another chapter in that long military tradition. On October 2, 2026, President Donald Trump approved the death sentence of former Army Major Nidal Malik Hasan, the man convicted of the Fort Hood killings. The Army has scheduled his execution for December 3, 2026, and the method will be a firing squad. After President Trump approved Hasan’s execution, Secretary of War Pete Hegseth announced plans to livestream it, sparking controversy. However, President Trump later rejected the livestream, and while victims’ families may be permitted to witness the execution, it remains unclear whether the general public will be allowed to attend. If the execution proceeds, it will be the first carried out by the United States military in more than 65 years. Having spent much of my adult life in uniform, I find the history, the regulations, and the traditions surrounding military executions fascinating and sometimes frustrating. Few realize that the President serves as the Commander in Chief and is the final approving authority before a military death sentence can be carried out. President Lincoln became famous for granting pardons, particularly to young soldiers who had fallen asleep on guard duty or deserted out of fear. He was reportedly troubled by the thought of a boy being shot simply because exhaustion had overcome him. Did you catch that? Just falling asleep could get you killed in the military, but Lincoln was not opposed to every execution. Lincoln also authorized the execution of Dakota Indians following their war with the United States. In 1862, following the U.S.-Dakota War in Minnesota, a military commission sentenced 303 Dakota men to death. The Dakota men were not U.S. soldiers and were not subject to ordinary U.S. Army courts-martial. They were tried by a military commission, whose jurisdiction and fairness remain subjects of historical criticism. Lincoln ordered the cases reviewed and ultimately approved 39 executions. One man received a reprieve, and on December 26, 1862, 38 Dakota men were hanged at Mankato, Minnesota. It is a remarkable contradiction. The President remembered for his compassion and the Emancipation Proclamation also authorized the largest mass execution in our nation’s history. On November 5, 2009, gunfire started at Fort Hood Texas. Army Major Nidal Malik Hasan, a military psychiatrist, started yelling Allah Akbar, and opened fire inside the Soldier Readiness Processing Center, where soldiers were getting medical checks and paperwork before deployment. When it was over, 13 people were dead, and 31 others had been wounded. Hasan was convicted of 13 murders, but one of those victims was pregnant with a 3-month old baby. Court records show that Private Francheska Velez just returned from Iraq and was crying, “my baby, my baby”, and then he shot her. Her unborn child’s death was never separately charged. Note: Military law actually allowed prosecutors to charge Hasan for the unborn child’s death. Article 119a of the Uniform Code of Military Justice specifically provides for a separate offense when an attack causes the death of an unborn child. For reasons that remain unclear, Army prosecutors did not pursue the additional charge. The rampage stopped when Sergeant Kimberly Munley and Sergeant Mark Todd, both Department of the Army civilian police officers confronted Major Hasan. Munley initially exchanged gunfire with Hasan and was shot in the hand and leg. She fell to the ground but continued firing until her gun malfunctioned. Hasan came over to her to shoot her again but his gun malfunctioned. He reloaded and continued picking people off. Sergeant Mark Todd then confronted Hasan and shot him multiple times, ending the attack. Hasan survived but was left paralyzed from the chest down. He was convicted of 13 murders and 32 counts of attempted murder. Note: 31 people was shot, but he missed one, resulting in 32 counts. In approximately ten minutes, reports say that Hasan fired 214 rounds and still had 177 rounds available and 16 magazines. He not only shot inside the building but went outside and shot people on the ground as other soldiers were trying to provide first aid before being shot himself. What followed was another controversy. During the Obama administration, the Department of Defense faced criticism for treating the attack as workplace violence rather than terrorism. The distinction was more than political terminology. It affected how the victims were recognized and whether they qualified for certain military honors and benefits. Congress eventually changed the eligibility requirements, allowing qualifying victims to receive Purple Hearts. Most Americans understand that the President is Commander in Chief of the armed forces. We associate that authority with sending troops into combat, directing military operations, and making decisions about national defense. But there is another responsibility that rarely makes the evening news. Under Article 57 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ), the President must approve a military death sentence before it can be carried out. That authority is not simply a tradition or an executive preference. It is federal law, enacted by Congress. The UCMJ establishes which military offenses may carry the death penalty. Article 18 authorizes general courts-martial to impose legally permitted punishments, including death for designated offenses. Article 118 covers murder, including premeditated murder. Article 52 establishes the unanimity requirements for capital cases, while Rule for Courts-Martial 1004 provides additional requirements for imposing a death sentence. The case must then pass through an extensive legal review process. Military appellate courts examine the conviction and sentence. Legal recommendations and clemency materials move through the chain of command, eventually reaching the President. Older military references identify Article 71 as the source of presidential approval authority. Congress subsequently moved that requirement to Article 57, effective in 2019. The Army announced that Hasan’s execution would take place at Fort Hood at 1 p.m. Central Time. The Secretary of the Army determines the method, date, and location under Army Regulation 190-55, Procedures for Military Executions, and in this case, the selected method is a firing squad. Now, before someone asks how a federal judge can interfere with an order from the Commander in Chief, there is another important distinction. The President’s approval does not eliminate judicial review. Hasan has exhausted his direct appeals, but he has not necessarily exhausted his legal options. Habeas corpus offers a narrow opportunity for federal court review, not another trial or an automatic delay. The President commands the military, but the Constitution and federal law govern the exercise of that authority. Hasan has had many court cases. He was sentenced to death on August 28, 2013, by court-martial, but the sentence was far from being carried out. The convening authority approved it on March 27, 2017, nearly four years after the court-martial. The Army Court of Criminal Appeals upheld the conviction and sentence on December 11, 2020. The case then moved to the Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces, the highest appellate court in the military justice system. That court initially affirmed the sentence in September 2023, then reconsidered part of its decision and issued a revised judgment on March 4, 2024. Hasan took his appeal to the United States Supreme Court, arguing that a closed hearing during his trial had violated his constitutional right to a public trial. On March 31, 2025, the Supreme Court declined to hear the case. By then, nearly sixteen years had passed since the Fort Hood shooting, and the military’s direct appellate process had run its course. Hasan had previously told military mental-health evaluators that he could become a martyr if executed. During sentencing, he made no effort to persuade the court to spare his life. Now we get to a part of military history that lets us see what happens in the military vs the civilian justice system. Most people picture a firing squad as a handful of soldiers standing in a line, waiting for someone to shout the order to fire. For Hasan, the Pentagon is working on how his execution will go, but historically and procedurally, there is considerably more to it than just shooting a guy. War Department Pamphlet No. 27-4, Procedure for Military Executions, dated June 12, 1944, described a formal military proceeding involving an execution officer, guards, a chaplain, medical personnel, a firing party, and even a military band. Imagine an Army installation during World War II. Soldiers are standing in formation. Officers have taken their assigned positions. The execution ground has been prepared, and an armed escort waits for the condemned prisoner. The escort moves toward the execution ground, the prisoner emerges, accompanied by the slow music of the band playing the Death March. The soldiers remain in formation as the condemned man approaches the place where his sentence will be carried out. The officer responsible for the execution formally announces the charges, findings, sentence, and execution order. The prisoner may be allowed to make a final statement, and a chaplain is available to provide religious assistance. Waiting nearby is the firing squad. Every soldier has an assigned responsibility. Every movement follows an established procedure down to the last note of music. This was not an improvised execution. It was a military ceremony surrounding the most severe punishment the government could impose, and it is a warning to others. The 1944 procedure specified a firing party consisting of twelve riflemen and a sergeant. Before the execution, twelve rifles were loaded under the supervision of the responsible officer. But not all twelve rifles contained live ammunition. The instructions required at least one and no more than four rifles to contain blanks. The remaining rifles were loaded with live rounds. The rifles were then placed randomly in a rack, and the soldiers selected their weapons without knowing which contained blanks. Why would the Army do that? One commonly suggested explanation is psychological. By introducing uncertainty, an individual soldier might never know whether his rifle fired a fatal round. It could ease the burden of knowing that he personally contributed to another man’s death. The regulation itself did not explicitly explain the reasoning, but I can understand the theory. The Army had made the execution a collective responsibility, and firing squads have long been regarded as a swift method of execution. Just ask Tennessee how lethal injections are going. The historical procedure also specified that the prisoner would be secured at the execution site. If the military member was still holding their rank, they would remove their rank, medals and awards, and then a hood is placed over their head. A medical officer placed a target over the prisoner’s heart, providing the firing party with a designated aiming point. The riflemen took their positions and waited for the commands. “Ready! Aim! Fire!” Twelve rifles discharged together. A medical officer then examined the prisoner to determine whether death had occurred. But the Army had also considered another possibility. What if the prisoner survived? Under the 1944 instructions, the firing-party sergeant could be directed to administer an additional pistol shot if the prisoner remained alive. In exceptional circumstances, another volley could be ordered. Medical personnel would then confirm death. It is a grim detail, but it demonstrates that military planners understood something the public often overlooks. Even a carefully organized execution can fail. Now, these are historical procedures. The Army has not publicly confirmed that the 1944 instructions will be used in Hasan’s execution. The current regulation, AR 190-55, establishes the modern responsibilities and planning requirements, but the complete firing-squad procedures have not been publicly disclosed. We do not know how many riflemen will participate, whether blanks will be used, what weapons will be selected, or what accommodations will be made for Hasan’s paralysis. There is one final detail from the history we don’t see in the movies. After the medical officer pronounced the prisoner dead, the riflemen returned their weapons to the racks, placing them there at random. The firing party was dismissed. The escort prepared to return to the parade ground and the military band? It began playing a lively tune! Think about that for a moment. The prisoner had entered the execution ground accompanied by the Death March. Now, with the sentence carried out, the music changed. The soldiers marched away. The formation dissolved. The officers returned to their duties. The Army went back to work. Whatever the original intent behind that tradition, the symbolism is difficult to ignore. One man’s life had ended. The institution continued and justice was served. Once the execution part is over, mortuary and administrative personnel then assume responsibility for the required documentation, handling of remains, and accounting for personal property. The appropriate next of kin may be contacted regarding disposition of the body. Depending on the applicable regulations and circumstances, arrangements may be made for preparation, release, and transportation of the remains. If the remains are not claimed, the Army has procedures for their disposition. The exact arrangements for Hasan’s remains have not been publicly disclosed. There is something significant about this final responsibility. The same institution that carries out the sentence must also account for the human being afterward. The punishment ends with death. The government’s obligations do not. If the death penalty is justified, why are there currently four soldiers on military death row, one of whom has been there since 1988? Why was Hasan convicted of murdering 13 people, but not charged with a 14th death for the unborn child of a pregnant soldier? If a soldier shouting “Allahu Akbar” while murdering his fellow soldiers can be described as committing workplace violence, what have we become when political convenience matters more than calling things what they are? Yet, we have people up in arms because President Trump is allowing a military justice process, rooted in nearly 250 years of American history, to run its course. A process that began with George Washington ordering a public execution. Thanks for joining us. Jim (D-Minus) Jones And please like, follow, and share. This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit dminusdiaries.substack.com (https://dminusdiaries.substack.com?utm_medium=podcast&utm_campaign=CTA_1)

2. 

   9 Oct 2026

   Killing with Kindness

   How hard can it be to kill someone? From failed executions and death-row appeals to assisted dying and the way we euthanize our pets, Killing with Kindnessasks an uncomfortable question: Have we become so concerned with dying humanely that we've forgotten what humane actually means? This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit dminusdiaries.substack.com (https://dminusdiaries.substack.com?utm_medium=podcast&utm_campaign=CTA_1)

3. 

   2 Oct 2026

   HELENE: TWO YEARS LATER

   Two years after Hurricane Helene changed the mountains of East Tennessee and western North Carolina, the scars are still visible. In this episode of D-Minus Diaries, I look back at what I saw firsthand in Poga and Elk Mills, the ordinary people who became angels, the officials and gatekeepers who got in the way, and the hard lessons we still have not learned about leadership, preparedness, and helping our neighbors when everything goes wrong. Links: - Ready.com (https://www.ready.gov) - American Red Cross Survival Kit Supplies (https://www.redcross.org/get-help/how-to-prepare-for-emergencies/survival-kit-supplies.html?utm_source=chatgpt.com) This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit dminusdiaries.substack.com (https://dminusdiaries.substack.com?utm_medium=podcast&utm_campaign=CTA_1)

Contact D-Minus Diaries Podcast

Guest appearances

Does not typically book guests

Based on episode analysis; this does not confirm that the show is currently accepting guests.