Jailed Marine shares new details of life in Mexican prison during live appearance on the Glenn Beck Radio Program

June 02, 2014

The Glenn Beck Program

Glenn has been following the story of jailed Marine Corps Sgt. Andrew Tahmooressi for a number of weeks now. Sgt. Tahmooressi has been in a Mexican prison since March 31 when Mexican federal officers arrested him for weapons possession. Tahmorressi and his mother Jill have maintained he took a wrong turn and crossed the southern border by mistake. The 25-year-old decorated war veteran and Florida native was in the process of relocating to San Diego for treatment of post-traumatic stress disorder. He had been in San Diego for 10 days when he ended up at the San Ysidro checkpoint.

After being arrested, Tahmooressi was originally held in Tijuana’s La Mesa Penitentiary, where he was placed in general population and his life was threatened. He was then moved to solitary confinement and shackled to a bed for nearly 30 days. Last week, Tahmorressi was moved to a maximum-security prison about 40 miles outside of Tijuana. He faces a sentence of six to 21 years in a Mexican prison for carrying his registered AR-15 rifle, .45-caliber pistol, and 12-gauge pump shotgun in his car across the border.

On radio this morning, Tahmooressi and his mother Jill both joined Glenn via phone to discuss what has transpired in the 63 days since he was first arrested. Tahmooressi candidly explained in his own words what happened the night he accidentally crossed the border and shared some new information about the conditions he has faced.

“It was 63 days ago that one of our heroes, one of the guys who has been fighting wars for us, was in San Diego… As the President makes a prisoner exchange – not a hostage release, a prisoner exchange – we have Sgt. Andrew Tahmooressi still in jail in Mexico,” Glenn said. “We have released 60,000 Mexicans onto the streets, and yet he is still sitting there, and nobody's even talking about it. For the first time, we have him on radio from his jail in Mexico, and his mom is also on the phone. She's kind of conference called us and put us together.”

To begin, Glenn asked Tahmooressi to explain what transpired when he reached the San Ysidro checkpoint.

In my own words, I was spending the day in Mexico, and I was hanging out, having some good food and walking around. I was thinking about staying the night in Mexico. I got a hotel in Mexico and decided that it wasn't a very nice hotel. It was dark and a little dirty, so I decided to go back to San Diego and be back with my friends cause I was missing my friends.

So I get a taxicab to the border, I cross the border, and I walk over to the parking lot where my truck is. I get in my truck, and I exit the parking lot. I make a left-hand turn followed by another left-hand turn that was – there was a road there that I was – I was – I got on that looked like it headed north back to San Diego, back to I-5 North. And I got on that road, and it happened that it turned, did a U-turn to the right, a swooping U-turn to the right and took me back on I-5 South heading to Mexico.

So I was driving nice and slow looking for a place to do a U-turn, but I couldn't find one. So that road took me maybe like another half mile down south to Mexico. And I get too the gate that was the Mexican border that I wasn't even sure if it was the Mexican border at the time. I figured it was, but I wasn't positive. And there was a lady sitting like three gates over to my left. And I stop at the gate and I wave to her to try to get her attention to tell her that I don't want to be in Mexico, but she waves me in like, you know, commanding me to go, go, come on, let's go.

So I follow my – her orders and I go. I did hesitate. I got a green light, the gate went up, I hesitated for like maybe 10, 15 seconds, cause I didn't want to be in Mexico, so once she ordered me in, there was three police officers, border police officers at a inspection table that are waving me in. So I drive to them. And put the car in park, and they ask me, ‘What is all this stuff that you have back here?’ I said I have all my stuff back here, clothes and things, and I have three guns. I told them immediately that I had three guns, and that I didn't want to be in Mexico. So I walk around the back of the truck with them, and I point out where my guns are, say I have two back here, a rifle and a shotgun and I have my pistol in the front on the passenger seat. So they go about looking at my guns, and they put the guns back in the truck, and they tell me that they're gonna help me out, that they're gonna take me back to the American border. They told me to wait maybe 30 to 45 minutes and that they were gonna get an escort vehicle for me to take me back to the border. They even – they asked me, they said, ‘You think it's gonna be okay with the American Border Patrol that I have three guns?’ And I said, ‘Yes, I think it's gonna be okay. I have permits for them, you know, I – I own these guns, so, yes, I think it's gonna be okay.’

So they moved my truck to another parking area, and they get my guns out at the truck, and they put 'em on the tailgate of my truck and they start getting all the ammunition out of 'em and all the ammunition out of my truck, and then they call on the radio, and I think what they said on the radio, which was in Spanish, that the – what the situation was that we have someone here with three guns, maybe they told them that I didn't want to be or not, I'm not sure, but there was a – shortly after that, there was a – a military captain that came over, and he took charge of the situation from there. And – and he – they took my truck from that one parking area into a fenced-in parking area that was screened in with black screen all around so no one could see what was going on. It was like a little hidden area, and – and then he – the military captain, he was very, like – he was, in a sense, I think he was trying to scare me a little bit. And – and of course I was nervous because I had – there was like 20 people there with military people with rifles, watching me and, you know, making sure that I wasn't gonna make any sudden movements or whatever, so I was – I was very afraid and nervous that they were gonna do something to me.

And I – you know, I think it was very – it was a very sketchy situation. There was something definitely not right there, and I think what it was was they were probably trying to get a bribe out of me, is what I think it was. What I'm pretty soon it was is that they were looking for a bribe, and they were trying to get me to sign some paperwork there that was all in Spanish, and there was no translator there to translate them. And I said, ‘No, I'm not gonna sign these paperwork – this paperwork. I don't understand them. I'm not signing them.’ And then they were saying after that point, they were saying, ‘Well, we're gonna take your truck. We're gonna take all your possessions. We're gonna take your guns.’ And then after they said that, that's when I called the 911 call, and I let 'em know. I said, ‘Hey, I'm in a bit of an emergency here, I accidentally drove into Mexico. And I didn't mean to be here, and I have three guns and they're trying to take my guns from me.’ So that's when that happened. And then – and then – and then – and then I was just more nervous, and I decided, you know, I'll sign the paperwork 'cause maybe that'll hopefully get me outta here, hopefully that will give 'em what they want and I could get out of here, and the lady who was translating who spoke broken English, she said that all the paperwork said was that I was in Mexico with three guns. I said okay, well, that's the truth, so I'll go ahead and I'll sign these papers. But shortly after the papers, they apprehended me and arrested me.

While Tahmooressi is still unsure of what the papers actually said, he explained the dangerous conditions he faced at Tijuana’s La Mesa Penitentiary.

“I was put in a cell, a small cell that was meant for six people. There was about 15 to 20 people in there, and there was all kinds of bad criminals in there… There was murderers in there and kidnappers and drug dealers and all these people,” he explained. “They threatened to rape me, they threatened to kill me, and I was very fearful. I was fearful to the point where my heart was pounding, and I couldn't have got a single word out if I had to yell for help.”

Fearing for his life, Tahmooressi attempted to escape, but he was apprehended and moved to solitary confinement where he was shackled to his bed.

I was just trying to get away, as far away as I could… [But] I was shot at by a lady on post. I surrendered… After that, you know, I got punished physically for maybe like 20 minutes to 30 minutes. And then after that I was stripped naked, and I was handcuffed – both my legs and my hands – around the post of a bunk bed there. I was there for maybe 12 hours, or maybe 10 hours, overnight, you know, shivering in the cold, naked. And then the next day they take me to another little cell by myself, and they cuff one of my legs to one wall and then they cuff my arm to the opposite wall about maybe two feet above my head. So I was there with my hand dangling above my head with… very minimum circulation going to my fingers there for… maybe 24 hours with no food, no water.

Then they take me off of the handcuffs, and… I was afraid that the prisoners were still gonna come and get me and that they were talking to the police officers, and that the police officers were gonna come and… torture me… and get information about my family. So I said I'm not gonna let them do that. There was a light bulb on… the ceiling, and I took this light bulb and I broke it and I stabbed myself in the neck cause I said, ‘I'm not gonna let them take my life. I'm gonna take my own life.’ That was my train of thought then, and I was there on my knees praying with blood pouring out of my neck, puddled on the floor.

Thankfully, thank God, the prisoners were outside of the door, and I think they heard the smash of the light bulb. And they came in, and I blacked out from there. Then I remember waking up on a bed in a room in the prison with IVs in my arms and with the doctor saying, ‘Andrew, come on, Andrew,’ trying to get me to wake up again. And thankfully I woke up again. They took me in an ambulance to a hospital, where they stitched me up, and then they took me back to the infirmary, the hospital in the prison, and then that's when they handcuffed all four of my limbs to the bed for a month.

TheBlaze has done a good deal of research into Tahmooressi and the events that unfolded before and after his arrest, but Glenn asked Tahmooressi if there is anything else that needs to be known.

“No, sir. God is my witness that I was not there doing any criminal activity. I had no intent on doing any harm or or breaking any laws or selling any guns or anything of that sort,” Tahmooressi said. “I've never been like that before in my life… I've always been a peaceful, loving man, and I don't break the law.”

The WhiteHouse.gov petition advocating for Tahmooressi’s release reached the necessary 100,000 signatures ahead of last Friday’s deadline, which means the Obama Administration, by law, is required to release an official statement. That statement will be the first from the Administration on the issue.

Glenn, meanwhile, asked his audience to continue to pray for Tahmooressi’s well being and safe return.

"Andrew, I'm going to ask for the audience to pray for you and pray that… you are encircled with truth. I admire you for not telling a lie,” Glenn concluded. “I will tell you that the only way God's powers work is if you're working with exactness, so tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God, and hopefully we will see his hand at work here. I'm disappointed in the hand of man, but never disappointed in the hand of God.”

Glenn: Pay attention to what the State Department's RADICAL reset is signaling

John McDonnell / Stringer | Getty Images

For years, the U.S. State Department operated on inertia—an institution locked into a cycle of caution, consensus, and risk aversion.

Speeches were careful, strategies were diluted by committees, and action was often defined by what couldn’t be done. The language was always the same: "nuance," "complexity," "stakeholders." Rarely was it about results.

That has changed.

What’s come out of the State Department in the last hundred days is a complete departure—not just in tone, but in structure.

Under Secretary Rubio, the department isn’t just adjusting tactics. It’s undergoing a philosophical reset.

The most telling shift is this: the department is no longer preoccupied with managing decline or defending abstractions. It’s operating from the premise that U.S. foreign policy must serve actual national interests, not vague global norms or ideological missions.

Look at the key decisions. The Global Engagement Center—an office that claimed to combat disinformation but increasingly acted as an internal censorship tool—is gone. Not repurposed. Not renamed. Eliminated. Aid programs that masked themselves as diplomacy while undermining core U.S. positions have been cut. Contracts to NGOs with open hostility toward U.S. policy goals? Revoked.

This isn’t cosmetic. It’s structural.

The department’s reorganization is consolidating power downward—removing bureaucratic silos, emphasizing merit over ideology, and restoring clarity to diplomatic goals. This isn’t about optics. It’s about removing friction between strategy and implementation. On immigration and border enforcement, there’s now a foreign policy posture that treats visa privileges as exactly that—privileges, not entitlements. Visa holders who break laws or support terrorist groups lose their status. Period. No press conference required. Just enforcement.

Regional partnerships are now framed by expectations, not entanglements.

Countries that allow mass illegal migration into the U.S. are being held accountable. Agreements are being structured around reciprocity. When those agreements are ignored, consequences follow. China’s influence in the Western Hemisphere, long treated as inevitable, has been directly challenged. Beijing’s role in Panama, particularly regarding the canal, has been dismantled through diplomacy backed by leverage, not lectures. That wasn’t done through press statements—it required statecraft, pressure, and the willingness to say no.

In Europe, there’s been a reframing of NATO obligations. Not as symbolic unity, but as measurable responsibility. The benchmark is no longer two percent. The conversation is now five. That changes the nature of the alliance. In Africa, the posture is shifting from dependency to commercial engagement. Trade, not aid. Access, not assistance. Diplomacy with terms, not with guilt.

The contrast is stark.

This isn’t a matter of tone or branding. This is a systemic shift away from a model that rewarded process over outcomes, toward one that is rediscovering the purpose of diplomacy: to secure advantage, resolve conflict, and protect national interests.

This recalibration will not be popular in foreign capitals used to ambiguity, or in institutions comfortable with drift. It’s also not universally admirable. It’s direct. It’s unambiguous. And it signals something rare in modern American foreign policy: conviction.

That alone is worth paying attention to.

Glenn: Why Memorial Day is not just another holiday

Anadolu / Contributor | Getty Images

They wore the uniform so you could live free. This holiday, ask yourself if you're living in a way that honors that sacrifice — or cheapens it.

Your son has been a Marine for what feels like an eternity. Only those who have watched their children deploy into war zones can truly understand why time seems to freeze in worry. What begins as concern turns to panic, then helplessness. You live suspended in a silent winter, where days blur and dread becomes your constant companion.

Then, in an instant, it happens. What you don’t know yet is that your child — your most precious gift — fell in combat 60 seconds ago.

This is a day for sacred remembrance, for honoring those who laid down their lives.

While you go about your day, unaware, military protocol kicks into motion. Notification must happen within eight hours. Officers are dispatched. A chaplain joins them. A medic may accompany them in case the grief is too much to bear.

Three figures arrive at your door. One asks your name. Then, by protocol, they ask to enter your home. You already know what’s coming. You sit down. He looks you in the eye and says:

The commandant of the Marine Corps has entrusted me to express his deep regret that your son John was killed in action on Friday, March 28. The commandant and the United States Marine Corps extend their deepest sympathy to you and your family in your loss.

This moment has played out thousands of times across American soil. In 2003 alone — just two years after 9/11 — 312 families endured it. In 2007, 847 American service members died in combat. In 2008, 352. In 2009, 346. The list goes on. And with every name, a family became a Gold Star family.

Honor the fallen

For most Americans, Memorial Day means backyard barbecues, family gatherings, maybe a trip to the lake or a sweet Airbnb. There’s nothing wrong with enjoying these things. But we must never forget why we can.

Ask any veteran who lived when others did not, and you’ll understand: Memorial Day is not just another holiday. It is a solemn day set apart for reverence.

So this weekend, reach out to a Gold Star family. Acknowledge their pain. Ask about their son or daughter. Let them know they’re not alone.

This is a day for sacred remembrance, for honoring those who laid down their lives — not for accolades but for love of country and the preservation of liberty. “Greater love hath no man than this, that a man lay down his life for his friends” (John 15:13).

They died for the Constitution, for our shared American ideals, and the worst thing we could do now would be to betray those ideals in a spirit of rage or division.

We cannot dishonor their sacrifice by abandoning the very principles they died to protect — equal justice, the rule of law, the enduring promise of liberty.

This Memorial Day, let us remember the fallen. Let us honor their families. Let us recommit ourselves to the cause they gave everything for: the American way of life.

They are the best of us.

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.

Trump exposes Left’s habeas corpus hijack in border crisis

Chicago Tribune / Contributor | Getty Images

Democrats accused the president of declaring war on civil rights. In reality, he’s defending habeas corpus while they drown it in delays and legal loopholes.

Tuesday’s congressional testimony from Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem turned heads for all the wrong reasons. Pressed to define “habeas corpus,” she stumbled. And while I respect Noem, this moment revealed just how dangerously misunderstood one of our most vital legal protections has become — especially as it’s weaponized in the immigration debate.

Habeas corpus is not a loophole. It’s a shield. It’s the constitutional protection that prevents a government from detaining a person — any person — without first justifying the detention before a neutral judge. It doesn’t guarantee freedom. It demands due process. Prove it or release them.

Bureaucratic inertia, activist judges, and political cowardice have turned due process into a slow-motion invasion. And the left knows it.

And yet, this doctrine — so essential to our liberty — is now being twisted by the political left into something it was never meant to be: a free pass for illegal immigration.

The left wants to frame this as a matter of compassion and rights. Leftists ask: “What about habeas corpus for migrants?” The implication is clear: They see any attempt to enforce immigration law as an attack on civil liberties.

But that’s a lie. Habeas corpus is not an excuse for indefinite presence. It doesn’t guarantee that every person who crosses the border gets to stay. It simply requires that we follow a process — a just process.

And that’s exactly what President Donald Trump has proposed.

Habeas corpus, rightly understood

Habeas corpus is the front door to the courtroom. It simply requires the government to justify why someone is being held or detained. It’s not about citizenship. It’s about human dignity.

America’s founders knew this — and that’s why they extended the right to persons, not just citizens. Habeas corpus isn’t a pass to stay in America forever — it’s a demand for legal clarity: “Why are you holding me?” That’s it.

If the government has a lawful reason — such as illegal entry — then deportation is a legitimate outcome. And yet, the left treats any enforcement of immigration law as a betrayal of American ideals.

The danger today isn’t that habeas corpus is being ignored; it’s that it’s being hijacked. The system is being overwhelmed with bad-faith cases, endless appeals, and delays that stretch for years. Right now, the immigration courts are buried under 3.3 million pending cases. The average wait time to have your case heard is four years. In some places, people are being scheduled for court dates as far out in 2032. Where is the justice in that?

This is not compassion. This is national sabotage.

Weaponizing due process

The left uses this legal bottleneck as a weapon, not a shield. Democrats invoke due process as if it requires the government to play a never-ending shell game with public safety. But that’s not what due process means. Due process means the state must play by the rules. It means a judge hears a case. It means the law is applied justly and equally. It does not mean an open border by procedural default.

So no, Trump is not proposing the end of habeas corpus. He’s calling out a broken system and saying, out loud, what millions of Americans already know: If we don’t fix this, we don’t have a country.

This crisis wasn’t an accident — it was engineered. It’s a Cloward-Piven playbook, designed to overwhelm the system. Bureaucratic inertia, activist judges, and political cowardice have turned due process into a slow-motion invasion. And the left knows it.

Abandon the Constitution?

Remember, the Constitution is not a suicide pact. But how do we balance the Constitution and our national survival without descending into authoritarianism? Abandon the Constitution? No. Burn the house down to get rid of the rats? Absolutely not. The Constitution itself gives us the tools to take on this crisis head on.

The federal government has clear authority over immigration. Illegal presence in the United States is not a protected right. Congress has the power to deny entry, enforce expedited removals, and reject bogus asylum claims. Much of this is already authorized by law — it’s simply not being used.

President Trump’s idea is simple: Use the tools we already have. Declare the southern border a national security emergency. Establish temporary military tribunals for triage. Process asylum claims swiftly outside the clogged court system. Restore “Remain in Mexico” so that the border is no longer a remote court room. Appoint more immigration judges, assign them to high-volume areas, and hold streamlined hearings that still respect due process.

That’s not authoritarian. That’s leadership.

The path forward

Trump is not trying to destroy habeas corpus. He’s trying to save it from being twisted into a self-destructive parody of itself. Leftists have turned due process into delay, justice into gridlock, and they’re dragging the entire country into their chaos.

It’s time to draw the line. Protect habeas corpus. Use it lawfully. Use it wisely. And yes — use it to restore order at the border. Because if we lose that firewall, we lose the republic.

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.

Betrayal of trust: Medicare insurers face lawsuit over kickback scheme

Spencer Platt / Staff | Getty Images

Editor's note: This article is sponsored by Chapter.

The U.S. government has filed a major lawsuit under the False Claims Act, targeting some of the biggest names in health insurance—Aetna, Elevance Health (formerly Anthem), and Humana—along with top insurance brokers eHealth, GoHealth, and SelectQuote. The allegation? From 2016 to at least 2021, these companies funneled hundreds of millions of dollars in illegal kickbacks to brokers to steer seniors into their Medicare Advantage plans.

If the allegations are true, it means many Americans may have been steered into Medicare Advantage plans that weren’t necessarily the best fit for their needs—not because the plans were better, but because brokers were incentivized by illegal kickbacks.

The Kickback Conspiracy

Navigating Medicare Advantage’s maze of plan options is daunting, so beneficiaries rely on brokers like eHealth, GoHealth, and SelectQuote, who claim to be unbiased guides. But from 2016 to 2021, insurers Aetna, Humana, and Elevance Health allegedly paid brokers millions in kickbacks to favor their plans, regardless of quality. Disguised as “co-op” or “marketing” deals, these payments were tied to enrollment targets. Internal emails revealed executives knew this violated the Anti-Kickback Statute, with one eHealth leader joking that the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) would miss a $15 million Humana deal for minimal enrollments. Brokers used call routing to prioritize high-paying insurers, betraying beneficiaries’ trust.

Discrimination Against the Vulnerable

The scheme wasn’t just about profits—it targeted vulnerable beneficiaries. Medicare Advantage must accept all eligible enrollees, including disabled people under 65. Yet Aetna and Humana allegedly pressured brokers to limit their enrollment, as these beneficiaries were deemed to be less profitable. Brokers complied, rejecting referrals and filtering calls to favor healthier enrollees, incentivized by bonuses. This violated federal anti-discrimination laws and CMS contracts, undermining the founding principles of Medicare by discriminating against the very people it was created to aid.

False Claims and the Pursuit of Justice

The schemes led to false claims to CMS, with insurers certifying enrollments as “valid” despite kickbacks and discrimination. The government paid billions, unaware of the fraud. Examples include Humana’s $12,477 for a 2016 enrollment and Aetna’s $79,047 for a 2020 case. On May 1, 2025, the U.S. filed suit, seeking treble damages and penalties under the False Claims Act. Aetna and others deny the allegations, per May 2025 reports, promising a fierce defense. The case, demanding a jury trial, seeks justice for beneficiaries and taxpayers.

Glenn's Show Prep