Fact Check: Clinton’s Benghazi chapter has holes

Excerpts of Hillary Clinton's forthcoming memoir obtained by Politico conflict with the factual record about what happened during and after the 2012 Benghazi terror attack.
Rep. Mike Pompeo, R-Kan., who sits on the newly formed Benghazi select committee and the House Intelligence Committee, told Fox News before the excerpts were released that he is concerned the administration has not fully grasped the impact of the terrorist assault.
"We know that intelligence analysts on the ground knew instantaneously that this was Al Qaeda and its affiliates who had led this attack. And yet it took an awfully long time -- indeed today, it's still not clear this administration has acknowledged the depth and the risks associated with what it means to have an Al Qaeda affiliate actually take down an American [consulate]," he said.
In the limited excerpts published Friday from Clinton’s Benghazi chapter, the former secretary of State continued to defend the administration from what she termed a “political slugfest.”
Specifically, she defended the flawed explanation -- used by then-U.N. Ambassador Susan Rice five days after the attack -- that an obscure anti-Islam video fueled a protest gone awry in Benghazi.
"There were scores of attackers that night, almost certainly with differing motives," Clinton wrote, according to Politico. "It is inaccurate to state that every single one of them was influenced by this hateful video.It is equally inaccurate to state that none of them were. Both assertions deny not only the evidence but logic as well."
Further, she reportedly wrote that Rice relied on existing intelligence in making her statements.
But former CIA deputy director Mike Morell, who now works for Clinton's principal gatekeeper Philippe Reines at the D.C. consulting firm Beacon Global Strategies, testified in April that it was Rice who linked the video to the Benghazi attack. Morrell, who still faces allegations he misled Congress over the so-called talking points, said the video was not part of the CIA analysis as Clinton seems to suggest.
Morell told members of the House Intelligence Committee that Rice’s claims about the attacks evolving from a protest were “exactly what the talking points said, and it was exactly what the intelligence community analysts believed.”
However, he said: “When she talked about the video, my reaction was, that's not something that the analysts have attributed this attack to."
An independent review of more than 4,000 social media postings, conducted by a leading social media monitoring firm in December 2012, also found the YouTube video was a non-event in Benghazi.
“From the data we have, it’s hard for us to reach the conclusion that the consulate attack was motivated by the movie. Nothing in the immediate picture -- surrounding the attack in Libya -- suggests that,” Jeff Chapman, chief executive with Agincourt Solutions (now Babel Street), told Fox News.
Chapman said his analysts reviewed postings in Libya, including those from Benghazi, over a three-day period beginning on Sept. 11, and saw “no traffic in Benghazi in the immediate lead-up to the attack related to the anti-Islam film.”
The first reference to the anti-Islam film appears to be a retweet of a Russia Today story that was not posted until Sept. 12 at 9:12 a.m. local time. The translation reads, “U.S. ambassador killed in Libya during his country's consulate in Benghazi - Russia Today http://t.co/SvAV0o7T response to the film abuser.”
In addition, the video was also described as a non-event by Greg Hicks – deputy to Ambassador Chris Stevens, who was killed in the attack -- in his May 2013 congressional testimony before the House oversight committee.
Clinton went on to write: "Every step of the way, whenever something new was learned, it was quickly shared with Congress and the American people.There is a difference between getting something wrong, and committing wrong.A big difference that some have blurred to the point of casting those who made a mistake as intentionally deceitful."
But the written testimony of Morell shows the administration continued to stick with the “hateful video” explanation long after physical evidence and other intelligence showed there was no demonstration. Morell told the House Intelligence Committee that by Sept. 18, 2012, consulate security video reviewed by the Libyans showed it was a direct assault.
Yet, a week later, before the United Nations on Sept. 25, 2012, President Obama was still relying on the flawed explanation.
“There is no speech that justifies mindless violence. There are no words that excuse the killing of innocents.There's no video that justifies an attack on an embassy,” he said.
As part of its ongoing reporting, Fox News was first to report on Sept. 17, 2012, based on an intelligence source on the ground in Libya, that there was no protest.
Separate from the talking points, Clinton's defense of Rice could also be problematic because Rice inaccurately stated on three network Sunday shows -- ABC’s “This Week,” NBC’s “Meet the Press” and “Fox News Sunday” -- that security was "strong" or "significant" at the consulate on the day of the attack.
She told “Fox News Sunday” that former Navy SEALs Ty Woods and Glen Doherty, who died in the attack, were there to “provide security,” incorrectly linking them to consulate security.
At a press conference earlier this month, Sens. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., and Kelly Ayotte, R-N.H., said the administration should explain who briefed Rice on the talking points as well as the consulate's security status, and the individual or individuals should be fired. And if nobody briefed her on that, Graham said, Rice should resign.
"They're completely incompetent, or they were misleading her about the level of security because we were six weeks before an election, or she made it up on her own,” Graham said.
On requests for additional security, Clinton continued to insist that she never saw those cables, and the fact that they were addressed to her as secretary of State was a “procedural quirk.”
Fox News was first to report on an August 2012 State Department classified cable that said the U.S. Mission in Benghazi convened an "emergency meeting" less than a month before the assault and concluded Al Qaeda had training camps in Benghazi and the consulate could not defend against a "coordinated attack."
The authenticity of the classified cable, addressed to the office of then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, has never been challenged. It was significant enough that then-Defense Secretary Leon Panetta and Joint Chiefs Chairman Gen. Martin Dempsey told lawmakers during congressional hearings that they were briefed on the cable’s warnings. Clinton, though, claimed it was not brought to her attention.
The cable marked "SECRET" summarized an Aug. 15, 2012 emergency meeting convened by the U.S. Mission in Benghazi. It states that the State Department’s senior security officer, also known as the RSO, did not believe the consulate could be protected.
According to a review of the cable, the Emergency Action Committee was also briefed "on the location of approximately ten Islamist militias and AQ training camps within Benghazi … these groups ran the spectrum from Islamist militias, such as the QRF Brigade and Ansar al-Sharia, to 'Takfirist thugs.'"
In addition to describing the security situation in Benghazi as "trending negatively," the cable said explicitly that the mission would ask for more help. The details in the cable foreshadowed the deadly attack on the U.S. compound.
While the administration’s public statements have suggested that the attack came without warning, the Aug. 16 cable undercuts those claims – as it warned the Benghazi consulate was vulnerable to attack and indicates the presence of anti-U.S. militias and Al Qaeda was well-known to the U.S. intelligence community.
The Clinton book excerpts published Friday represent a fraction of the entire Benghazi chapter, which reportedly is 34 pages long.

Oregon's governor seeks to sue contractor over state's failed ObamaCare exchange

Oregon Gov. John Kitzhaber said Thursday he is seeking to file a lawsuit against the contractor who built the state’s failed ObamaCare exchange, but the company says it isn’t to blame.
The Democratic governor asked the state’s attorney general to sue Oracle Corp., the main technology contractor for Cover Oregon, for embarrassing the state and wasting money.
"This is a very serious decision taking on a very large corporation — the second-largest software corporation in the world — but I do not believe they've delivered for the state of Oregon," Kitzhaber told The Associated Press.
Oregon paid Oracle $134 million in federal funds to build what turned out to be a glitch-filled Cover Oregon website, which the state scrapped last month in favor of the federal exchange.
Oregon is the only state that still doesn't have an online portal where the general public can sign up for health insurance in one sitting through a marketplace required under ObamaCare.
In a letter to Attorney General Attorney General Ellen Rosenblum, Kitzhaber said he has fired state managers in charge of Cover Oregon, and now it's time to hold accountable the website's main technology contractor.
Kitzhaber said Rosenblum will make the ultimate decision about whether to file a lawsuit, but he believes the state has strong claims. Rosenblum responded in a letter to the governor that her legal team has been reviewing options and developing legal strategies.
"I share your determination to recover every dollar to which Oregon is entitled," she wrote. Cover Oregon and Oracle have agreed not to initiate legal action before May 31.
Oracle, which is headquartered in Redwood City, California, said in a statement Thursday it was not responsible for the failed launch.
"Contrary to the story the State is promoting, Oracle has never led the Oregon Health Exchange project," Oracle's statement said. "OHA (the Oregon Health Authority) and Cover Oregon were in charge and badly mismanaged the project by consistently failing to deliver requirements in a timely manner and failing to staff the project with skilled personnel."
The governor is trying to shift blame from where it belongs, the company said, adding it is confident an investigation would "completely exonerate Oracle."
In a letter to Cover Oregon's temporary leadership last month, Oracle President and Chief Financial Officer Safra Catz wrote that the company provided "clear and repeated warnings" to Cover Oregon that the exchange website would not be ready to launch last October.
The website's failure has been an embarrassment for the Democratic governor, who enthusiastically embraced Obama's health care law and has for decades been a respected voice on health care policy. Kitzhaber's Republican rival in the November election, state Rep. Dennis Richardson, has made the Cover Oregon problems a centerpiece of his campaign.
Kitzhaber declined to say how much money he hoped to recover from Oracle, but he said he's willing to pay for the portions of the website that do work.
A review commissioned by Kitzhaber placed blame on the state's contract with Oracle, which said the company would be paid based on its time and materials rather than specific content delivered. The review also faulted the state's decision not to hire a system integrator to oversee the project.
Kitzhaber acknowledged the state's failings but said Oracle shares the blame.
"I don't think by any stretch of the imagination Oracle or anyone else could assume that we were paying them to produce a website that didn't work," Kitzhaber said.
Kitzhaber also sent a letter to the inspector general of the Department of Health and Human Services urging the federal agency, which supplied the money that paid Oracle's bills, "to levy the appropriate fines and penalties to hold Oracle accountable.
In 2011, Oracle agreed to pay nearly $200 million to settle charges that it defrauded the U.S. government on a software contract. The Justice Department alleged that Oracle failed to tell the federal government about discounts available to other customers. The allegations initially were raised in a suit against the company under the False Claims Act, which provides financial rewards to private litigants who report alleged fraud against the government.
Kitzhaber urged U.S. Sens. Ron Wyden and Jeff Merkley to also use the authority of their offices to investigate Oracle's culpability. Wyden is chairman of the Senate Finance Committee.
The Associated Press contributed to this report

White guy killer syndrome: Elliot Rodger’s deadly, privileged rage by Brittney Cooper

( Bailey) "I've put this little jewel in my IDIOT section on pinterest."  http://www.pinterest.com/bllsbailey/

 Welp. Another young white guy has decided that his disillusionment with his life should become somebody else’s problem. On Saturday, 22-year-old Elliot Rodger (who, as many commenters have pointed out, had a white father and mother of Asian descent) went on a killing spree on the campus of University of California, Santa Barbara, murdering his three roommates, shooting women outside a sorority house, and hitting people with his car as he attempted to get away from police.
How many times must troubled young white men engage in these terroristic acts that make public space unsafe for everyone before we admit that white male privilege kills? While Mark Cuban is busy crossing the street at any sign of a black male in a hoodie, or clutching his wallet a bit tighter at the sign of a tatted-up white guy, he may find a bullet whizzing by his head from a young, clean-cut white man, child of a Hollywood film director, upset that he does not have a certain level of clout and status with the ladies.
The idea that it is young black men or working-class white men (which is partially what I think Cuban’s invocation of tattoos attempts to encode) who make public space dangerous is belied by the fact that the problems of urban violence, which disproportionately involve young men of color, largely happen on residential terrain. Black men are not rolling onto college campuses and into movie theaters on a regular basis to shoot large numbers of people. Usually, the young men who do that are white, male, heterosexual and middle-class.
And make no mistake: From my standpoint as an armchair therapist — having read transcripts of Rodger’s videos —  his anger is about his failure to be able to access all the markers of white male heterosexual middle-class privilege. He goes on and on about his status as a virgin, his inability to find a date since middle school, his anger and resentment about being rejected by blond, sorority women. In fact, he claims he will “slaughter every single spoiled, stuck-up, blond slut I see.” As Jessica Valenti so thoroughly demonstrates: “misogyny kills.” I am struck by the extent to which Rodger believed he was entitled to have what he deemed the prettiest girls, he was entitled to women’s bodies, and when society denied him these “entitlements” he thought it should become the public’s problem. He thought that his happiness was worth the slaughter of multiple people.

Vets died. VA lied. Heads must roll. Congress must act

For the past five weeks, America has heard testimony from courageous whistleblowers, seen media exposés, and now has proof from the acting  Inspector General's (IG) report -- all of it pointing to one central and unfortunate truth: the Department of Veterans Affairs is a dysfunctional, corrupt, and severely mismanaged department that is failing America’s veterans.
The Twitter-sphere has aptly dubbed it the #VAscandal.  But at this point, it’s no longer a scandal—it’s a national disgrace of the highest order. The release of Wednesday's preliminary IG report on the Phoenix VA confirms our worst fears and deepest held beliefs—that delayed medical care and manipulating records is “systemic throughout” VA.

The Department of Veterans Affairs is a dysfunctional, corrupt, and severely mismanaged department that is failing America’s veterans.

According to the report, Phoenix VA officially stated that veterans were waiting 24 days on average for care at their facility but they were actually waiting 115 days. The names of 1,700 waiting veterans at the Phoenix VA simply vanished, as if they never existed. Moreover, the IG has expanded the investigation to 42 VA facilities, not just the previously reported 26—underscoring an even more poignant hashtag: #NotJustPhoenix. The IG report goes on for pages upon pages with similar outrageous findings.
Bottom line: VA lied. Veterans died. And now it’s time for heads to roll and Congress to step up.
Just one week ago, the push for greater accountability at the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) was gaining steam. With more facts emerging, and before this IG report, the House of Representatives passed the VA Management Accountability Act (H.R. 4031) as a first step toward reform at the dysfunctional department.
But now that good start is being jeopardized by a lack of action in the Senate, owing to a cynical political game on the part of the Obama administration and Senator Bernie Sanders of Vermont, chair of the Senate Veterans Affairs Committee.  A cynical game that, in light of today’s findings, should have every red-blooded American up in arms.
The bipartisan House vote for H.R. 4031 was stunningly lopsided, something we rarely see in today’s gridlocked Washington. The bill passed 390-33, with 160 Democrats and even Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi voting in favor of more accountability at the VA.
The support for the VA Management Accountability also stems from the bill’s directness, clarity and simplicity. Unlike the typical incomprehensible mishmash of logrolling and favor-seeking we see in most legislative fixes these days, H.R. 4031 is under 3 pages long, and entails a simple common-sense reform: it gives the VA secretary the authority to remove and replace executives who fail to perform. Period.
So after such a remarkable bipartisan endorsement from the House, what happens in the Senate? Sanders has declared he wouldn’t allow a vote on the bill, which would need to go through legislative hearings to study the proposal and determine its “implications.”
As a reminder, the bill is 3 pages long and the House has already held hearings.
As veterans wait on secret lists, have Harry Reid and Bernie Sanders had a chance to read the bill yet?  You bet they have. So why would Sanders slow-walk the bill? Based upon his recent public comments, he appears to be siding with career bureaucrats—i.e., the same people who have driven the VA into a ditch—over the needs of veterans.
Meanwhile, the Obama administration has already signaled opposition to H.R. 4031, suggesting the bill would open the government to the threat of litigation from fired employees.
So how can we expect this to play out? The Obama administration’s tepid response—marked by expressions of deep concern and the “firing” of a single VA undersecretary who was already set to retire in just a few weeks—suggests they’re hoping the scandal will burn out if they don’t give it too much attention.
In a few weeks, when the VA scandal drops from the front pages (which won’t happen if the organization I lead has anything to say about it), they’ll dismiss it as “old news” and cynically argue that their critics are motivated by partisan advantage. This has been the administration’s approach to previous scandals, and it’s worked before.
Meanwhile, Sanders will continue to stall the progress of the VA Management Accountability Act, and may even go so far as to reintroduce his own VA “reform” bill that failed in the Senate earlier this year. That bill would have dramatically expanded the VA’s responsibilities and provided billions in new funding—without fixing what’s wrong at the department. That’s a recipe for continued dysfunction and disaster.
The standoff on the VA Management Accountability is a case study in why Americans have lost faith in Washington. Many pundits lament the fact that Washington can’t achieve major accomplishments, but at this point most Americans would be satisfied with basic good governance. When it’s impossible to enact even the simplest and most straightforward of administrative reforms, such as the VA Management Accountability Act represents, it’s clear something is deeply wrong.
Which is why veterans, their families and taxpayers who care about government accountability should take up the cause and contact Harry Reid and Bernie Sanders. Demand that the Senate give the VA Management Accountability Act (sponsored by Sen. Marco Rubio) and up-or-down vote. Demand that senators go on record as either being for the bureaucrats or for our veterans.
Let’s not allow Senator Sanders, Senator Reid and the Obama administration to get away with burying this scandal. It’s time to send a clear message: veterans are the ones who are “mad as hell” and we will accept nothing less than action.

This WWII veteran on ultimate wait list: He gets benefits after 68 years

The Veterans Administration is under fire for its long waiting lists, but it's unlikely any of America's service members can match the claim by Milton Rackham: It took 68 years before he was given the benefits he earned in battle.
The 89-year-old Rackham, of Belding, Mich., lived for decades without any benefits because the VA told him his records were lost in a fire in Missouri, the World War II veteran and Purple Heart recipient told FoxNews.com.
"They always said, 'we can't help you,'" recalled Rackham, a former engine mechanic with the U.S. Navy who suffered injuries during the war and later struggled to find work.
"It made me feel like I was worthless," he said.
In 2011, Rackham's friend, Myrl Thompson, began writing about Rackham's war stories, and arranged meetings between the veteran and VA officials over the benefits he allegedly never received. Roughly two months ago, Rackham claims he started receiving $822 a month from the VA as well as $7,000 in back-pay.
Perhaps more alarming is the allegation by Rackham that the VA had no new information on his record to prompt the payments some 68 years after he left the Navy.
"What drove me crazy was that they had the same information in 2008 and they denied me," he told FoxNews.com. "That’s what blows me out of the water. Ever since 1974, when I first asked for benefits, they've had the same information."
"Sometimes the truth is stranger than fiction," Rackham said. 
Rackham, who grew up herding cattle in Rigby, Idaho, said he enlisted in the Navy when he was 17 years old -- against the wishes of his mother. He fought aboard the PT Boat 81 in the Aleutian Islands for his first year. He later transferred to the South Pacific, where he was severely injured while defending a U.S. ammunition supply ship during a Japanese kamikaze attack. The explosion caused Rackham serious shrapnel wounds that nearly led to the amputation of an arm and leg.
After spending two years in Navy hospitals in Hawaii and Manila, Rackham returned to civilian life in Rigby. 
During his mid-twenties, Rackham, who suffered from post-traumatic stress disorder, set out for work only to be rejected by employers due to his weakened arms and hands.
"He couldn't handle the manual labor of being a mechanic," said Rackham's friend Thompson, 75, of Big Rapids, Mich. 
Rackham, a devout churchgoer, later married and moved to Michigan, where he managed to run an upholstery business from his garage. For years, the father of six struggled financially. It was not until 1974 when he first applied to the VA for benefit consideration. He was denied five or six times over the course of 40 years, according to Rackham, due to "lack of complete information." 
Thompson said he helped Rackham submit to the VA in 2013 detailed documentation of Rackham's service in the Navy. Following that submission, Thompson said Rackham received a letter, stating that his VA benefits had been approved "at the level of 50 percent." Since early this year, Rackham receives monthly checks of $822 that are labeled "VA benefit," which the 89-year-old is able to use to cover his medication and other costs. 
Rackham's wife, Carol, might be eligible for spousal benefits, but has received no money to date, according to the family. 
The U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs had no immediate comment when contacted Thursday, saying they needed time to review Rackham's file. 
While Rackham was elated to receive the money so many years later, his shrapnel wounds remain.
"I still set off the metal detector at the airport," he told FoxNews.com.
Most devastating to Rackham is the emotional scar caused by war and left untreated by a system he claims failed him. 
"I’d go to bed and wake my wife up with my screaming and thrashing around in bed," he said. "The nightmares ... they have been ongoing for 66 years and continue to this day." 
Still, he says, "I was so proud to serve this country. I'm still able to get into my uniform."
Rackham also indicated that he was advised by friends to appeal the $822 and the $7,000, which amounts to 10 months in back pay, but he opted not to, saying, "I won't live long enough to go through the VA process one more time."
He said his message to the VA is simple: "One out of every six homeless people in America is a veteran. For heaven's sake, acknowledge them. They should never be forgotten."

Former Vice President Cheney: Obama is a 'very, very weak president'

 Former Vice President Dick Cheney told Fox News’ Sean Hannity Wednesday that he believes President Obama is a “very, very weak president” who does not understand America's obligations around the world.
Cheney said on “Hannity” he has spoken with many people in the Middle East who believe Obama’s leadership has reduced American’s influence overseas. 
“They all are absolutely convinced that the American capacity to lead and influence in that part of the world has been dramatically reduced by this president,” he said. “We’ve got a problem with weakness, and it’s centered right in the White House.”
Cheney said Obama’s plan to remove all troops from Afghanistan by 2016, instead of negotiating an agreement to keep some troops in the country, is an example of his weakness.
“That’s stupid, it’s unwise, and it will in fact just reinforce the notion that we’re weak, that we’ve got a leader who doesn’t understand U.S. obligations and commitments around the world and is not prepared to act on them,” he said.
Cheney said Obama is “totally ignoring” why the U.S. invaded Afghanistan.
“It’s as though he wasn’t even around when 9/11 happened,” he said.
Cheney said Obama’s choice to not continue the presence in Afghanistan was also disrespectful to the military members who served there.
The former vice president also turned to the VA scandal, calling it an “outrage.” He said the Obama administration needs to take responsibility, despite the fact that some prominent Democrats, including House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, have blamed the agency’s problems on the Bush administration.
“Six years out since we left office and we are still blamed by Nancy Pelosi and Barack Obama for their current troubles,” he said.

American Killed In Mexican Border City Hours After U.S. Issues Travel Warning

Mexican authorities discovered the body of an Arizona man killed execution-style on the main highway south of the dangerous border city of Nogales on Monday, hours after the U.S. Consulate General in the city issued a travel advisory for the region.
Police said that the body of Jorge Luis Soto, 25, was found at the wheel of a 1997 Chevrolet Tahoe with gunshot wounds to his face and chest. The SUV’s engine was still running and was parked under an overpass on the highway.
Police in Tucson and neighboring Nogales, Arizona said they had not been notified by Mexican officials about the murder.
Soto’s death is one of five murders in the last three days in Nogales. Four of the victims were found shot dead in cars, but Mexican authorities have not confirmed if the slayings are related.  
Late on Sunday evening, the U.S. Consulate General in Nogales – which is located in the state of Sonora – issued a warning for U.S. citizens traveling in the region.
“Due to multiple and ongoing credible threats, the Consulate cautions Americans traveling in Nogales or surrounding areas to defer unnecessary travel at this time,” the warning said. “U.S. Citizens are urged to take the highest precautions regarding their safety and personal security in and around Nogales.”
The U.S. State Department has had a travel advisory for Nogales and surrounding areas in Sonora for a number of years, warning that the region is a hotspot in the international drug and human trafficking trades. The State Department hasn’t updated its travel warning in Sonora since January.
"Don't go. Three things you can consider if you choose to go: Number one, go in a group. Number two, stay in downtown shopping district. Number three, leave before it gets dark," E. Dwayne Tatalovich, a security consultant told Fox 10 about travel to Nogales.
Nogales is a popular destination for medical tourism – many Americans head to the border town for cheap plastic surgery, inexpensive dental procedures and low-priced prescription medicine that can be purchased in Mexico without a prescription.
After the Sinaloa Cartel took control of key drug-trafficking routes in Sonora from the Beltrán-Leyva Cartel in 2010, the region has experienced tenuous peace as the two cartels have operated under a supposed truce that has seen violence spike in other parts of Mexico such as in Matamoros and Nuevo Laredo.
But the spate of killings, along with a December 2013 gun battle between Mexican authorities and drug traffickers in Puerto Penasco, have raised concerns that widespread drug violence is rising in Sonora.
There is speculation that the recent capture of Sinaloa cartel boss Joaquín “El Chapo” Guzmán could create a new round of cartel fighting as a power struggle ensues for the trafficking routes. So far, however, Mexican authorities have remained quiet about the motive of the recent murders or if they were drug-related.

Marine sergeant jailed in Mexico on gun charges speaks exclusively 'On The Record'

 (Bailey) "I've got a good idea, how about us trading back all their eleven million citizens that are over here illegally for our Marine."

A U.S. Marine who has spent nearly two months in a Mexican prison following his arrest for mistakenly crossing the border with registered guns in his pickup truck has spoken exclusively about the case to Fox News' Greta Van Susteren.
Sgt. Andrew Tahmooressi spoke to Van Susteren by phone from prison Wednesday evening. He had spent part of the morning at a court hearing. Earlier in the day, Tahmooressi fired his attorney Alejandro Osuna, who had earlier advised Tahmooressi to claim that he had never been to Tijuana. 
Tahmooressi was arrested March 31 at the San Ysidro checkpoint, where he realized that he was about to enter Mexico with his weapons after taking a wrong turn. He claims that he acknowledged that he had weapons in the car and told officials at the checkpoint that he had no intention of entering Mexico. He described what happened next to Van Susteren.
"[A Mexican border guard] got on the walkie-talkie and was communicating what was going on," Tahmooressi said. "I think what he said was, 'Hey we've got a guy down here with three guns.'" 
That message brought a Mexican Marine to the scene. 
"He just took control," Tahmooressi said of the officer. "He didn't seem to care at all about anything that I had to say. It was like a math equation in his head. Three guns, man equals prison."
Watch the full interview with Sgt. Andrew Tahmooressi on 'On The Record with Greta Van Susteren" Thursday at 7 p.m. Eastern on Fox News Channel.