Don't you see that this leads to an infinite regress? You say you want to do something, but free will requires you to be able to justify why you did what you did. And then you give a reason for why you did what you did, but then why did you do the thing which you did?
Pick a random country. Any country. Notice this processes which you are going through. Notice the selecting and the choosing, and the "freeness "which you are going through. What if I were to say that this very processes proves that free will does not exist?
In order to unpack this, we must first establish the options that one has to pick.
1)A person is not free to choose a country which they do not know exists.
2)A person cannot choose a country which didn't occur to them
3)You can only choose what occurs to you
The first option is obvious. If you don't know it, then you cannot choose it. You are not free to choose it, so to speak.
The second option however, is a little more confronting. Perhaps all readers know about Argentina but for some reason, your Argentina neurons were not functioning and you did you think it it. This then begs the question, what canyon think about?
The third option is to unpack what you can choose. Say you chose America. The first thing to note is that you only "chose" it because it occurred to you. But how do you choose what occurs to you? The process of something occurring toyon is unsolicited, it is impossible to choose what occurs to you.
Secondly, say the countries America and China occurred to you (you did not choose for these two countries to occur to you, they simply did). Ask yourself, why did you choose America? When subjects in a lab are asked to justify their actions(whilst under the influence of some independent variable) the test subject usually does not know the real reason why their actions occurred the way that they did (assuming an experienced experimenter was involved). However, this isn't to say they don't have a tale to tell. If you asked a person who has been hypnotised why they did certain things, they usually have bizarre reasons forwhy the did what they did (though unconvincing to us, the subject remains convinced of their tale). Returning to the case of free will, why does one choose Americas opposed to China. Well, one may say that "they just had an American hotdog last night and so America appealed to them". However, this is no justification, it is merely stating a fact. It's like if you asked a murderer why they murdered and they said "I killed him". So why choose America instead of China because you ate a hotdog? Why couldn't you think "well I've just had a hotdog, let's switch things up, I'll choose China". This process of "choosing" because of your apparent "justification" is no more than your neurons making a decision for you and you being aware of this decision.
You cannot know how things occur to you and neither can you know why you "chose" the option of which you did.