BILLINGS- Republican U.S. Senate candidate Tim Sheehy is once again addressing questions about a gunshot wound he says he suffered overseas while fighting as a Navy SEAL in Afghanistan.

The topic has become a focal point in the final days leading up to the election, with former FOX News reporter Megyn Kelly the latest to question Sheehy about the incident and the murky details surrounding what happened.

Sheehy appeared on Megyn Kelly’s podcast. During the interview, Kelly asked Sheehy, “Did you shoot yourself in the arm?” Sheehy replied: “No, that was never the allegation.”

Sheehy told the host he was shot during friendly fire that ricocheted down by an embedded Afghan soldier and says he never reported the injury to keep his unit uncompromising.

However, National Park records show Sheehy was cited in 2015 for discharging a firearm at Logan Pass inside Glacier National Park, where a bullet grazed his right forearm.
Sheehy issued a handwritten statement to the National Park Service at the time, admitting the improperly stored gun fell and fired.

He also addresses that incident during his interview with Megyn Kelly, telling Kelly that he wasn’t shot in the park, but that he felt the bullet dislocate in his arm after falling while hiking. When asked about medical records to support that claim, Sheehy told Kelly there were no such medical records, even though a written statement obtained at the time shows Sheehy’s account of being struck by the bullet.

The former FOX News anchor and conservative journalist responded to Sheehy’s answers by saying, “So confused.”

Sheehy believes the commotion over his gunshot wound is an attempt by the Tester campaign to attack the Republican’s character just days before the election.

His campaign released the following statement.

“Tim Sheehy humbly served our nation with honor and served alongside many heroes. Many of them never came home. Point. The bullet in Tim’s arm was the result of his service in Afghanistan. Tim never reported this because he didn’t want to trigger an investigation on his team, be removed from the battlefield, and see a teammate punished. It was always about protecting a teammate of his unit who he believed might have been responsible from the ricochet of friendly fire in the heat of an enemy engagement.”