Connect with us

Politics

Trump's call to reopen Alcatraz falls flat with tourists, who ask: Why and how?

Published

on

Trump's call to reopen Alcatraz falls flat with tourists, who ask: Why and how?

The exhibits on Alcatraz Island, the infamous federal prison that decades ago was shuttered and preserved as a national park site and tourist attraction, invite visitors to imagine what it was like to be a guard or an inmate confined to the lonesome, foggy rock in the middle of San Francisco Bay.

But on Monday, a day after President Trump posted on social media that he wants to reopen the nearly century-old prison as a “substantially enlarged and rebuilt ALCATRAZ, to house America’s most ruthless and violent Offenders,” many tourists were imagining a very different role: what it would be like to be the construction manager who might actually have to figure out how to make that happen.

“I’m all for what [Trump] is doing, but this doesn’t make sense,” said Beverly Klir, 63, an ardent Trump supporter who was visiting from Chicago. “I believe Gitmo [the prison at Guantanamo Bay] may be better. That’s where they all belong. They don’t belong here.”

She and her husband were standing amid a riot of pink flowers on the island’s craggy bluffs, looking out at the Golden Gate Bridge as a pair of Canada geese and three fuzzy ducklings waddled by. Behind them loomed the prison, its fortress-like facade menacing in appearance, but also a testament to age and weather, with crumbling stucco, deteriorated masonry and leaking joints.

Higher up on the island, outside the three-story cellhouse where some of the nation’s most incorrigible prisoners were once locked away in primitive cells, 10-year-old Melody Garcia, visiting with family from Concord, appeared equally perplexed. “Most of Alcatraz is broken down and stuff,” she said.

Advertisement

Still, within hours of Trump’s pronouncement, the Bureau of Prisons released a statement saying it was already on the job.

“The Bureau of Prisons will vigorously pursue all avenues to support and implement the President’s agenda,” said bureau Director William K. Marshall III. “I have ordered an immediate assessment to determine our needs and the next steps. USP Alcatraz has a rich history. We look forward to restoring this powerful symbol of law, order, and justice.”

Many California officials, meanwhile, responded with a range of ridicule and concern. A spokesperson for Gov. Gavin Newsom dismissed the pronouncement as a ploy designed to distract voters from Trump’s actions as president. State Sen. Scott Wiener (D-San Francisco) called it “unhinged.” But he also cautioned that “when Donald Trump says something, he means it,” and speculated that Trump may want to “open a gulag here in the U.S.”

The U.S. government’s presence on Alcatraz began in the 1850s, with construction of a fort bristling with cannons to defend San Francisco from hostile ships.

Soon after, U.S. officials also began using it as a military prison. During the Civil War, the crew of a Confederate ship, along with Union soldiers convicted of rape, murder, desertion and other offenses, were imprisoned there. The U.S. Army also locked up Hope, Apache and Modoc Indians there and, later, conscientious objectors to World War I.

Advertisement

In 1934, Alcatraz opened as an official federal prison for men who had made escape attempts from other federal prisons, or otherwise misbehaved. Among its notable inmates were Al Capone and George “Machine Gun” Kelly.

Known as “the Rock,” the prison, which had capacity for 336 men, earned a place in popular culture as an island of remote despair. “Everybody wants to be an individual,” said former inmate James Quillen, who served 10 years there, from 1942 to 1952. “You want to be human. And you weren’t at ‘the Rock.’”

In addition to being formidable, the prison was fearsomely expensive to maintain and operate. So expensive, in fact, that in 1963, then-Atty. Gen. Robert F. Kennedy ordered it closed.

John Martini, an Alcatraz historian, said the prison was closed in part because it was built with flawed construction methods and was decaying, and it “would be such a money pit to bring it up to standards … that it was easier to build a new penitentiary.”

Six years later, the island acquired a prominent place in Native American history when a group of Native American activists landed on the island, declaring they were taking it in the name of “Indians of All Tribes.” The occupation lasted 19 months, and helped awaken the nation to the concerns of Indigenous Americans.

Advertisement

When federal agents moved in to remove the last occupiers in 1971, officials had plans to bulldoze the entire thing. But in 1972, Congress created the Golden Gate National Recreation Area, and the island instead became one of San Francisco’s most beloved attractions. More than 1.4 million people visit each year, walking through the dank cell blocks and taking in exhibits on the Native American occupation.

In calling for Alcatraz to be reopened, Trump said its restoration would “serve as a symbol of law, order, and justice.”

But the Golden Gate National Parks Conservancy, a nonprofit that helps preserve and support operations at Alcatraz, issued a statement Monday saying the prison’s stature as a historic landmark and educational destination already serves an important role.

“Alcatraz hasn’t been a working prison for over 60 years,” the organization said in its statement. “Today, it’s a powerful symbol — a National Historic Landmark preserved for all time, a transformative national park experience and global site of reflection. … This is where history speaks — and where we learn from the past to shape a better future. “

John Kostelnik, western regional vice president of the Council of Prison Locals 33, said the idea of reopening Alcatraz was not only an “irresponsible” use of federal money but also a slap in the face to prison guards, who have long complained about low wages.

Advertisement

“It just seems very hypocritical that they came in and said they’re going to make government more efficient and DOGE and all that stuff,” Kostelnik said, using the acronym for Elon Musk’s cost-cutting team, “and now they’re saying they’re gonna throw hundreds of millions of dollars at a symbol.”

In December, the Bureau of Prisons said it was closing its troubled federal prison in Dublin, Calif., about 30 miles east of San Francisco, as well as five minimum-security prison camps in states from Florida to Colorado. The bureau said in a document obtained by the Associated Press that it was closing the facilities to address “significant challenges, including a critical staffing shortage, crumbling infrastructure and limited budgetary resources.”

San Francisco Mayor Daniel Lurie’s office directed inquiries about the Alcatraz proposal to the National Park Service, which did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

Tourists roaming the island Monday seemed preoccupied with two questions: How and why?

“It’s not ready. It is in no way, shape or form ready,” said Daniel Mulvad, 24, who lives in San Francisco and was visiting with guests from out of town. He noted that the costs of renovating the structure would be astronomical and seemed senseless given that, as a tourist attraction, Alcatraz appeared to be generating a great deal of revenue through ticket sales and merchandise.

Advertisement

“You’d have to really … rewire,” said Alyssa Sibley, 26, of Sacramento, as she stood in the old shower room, staring at the crude and rusting bathroom fixtures.

Tumidei Valentin, 34, a French psychologist vacationing in California, decried it as a “terrible idea.” “Every day he has new ideas,” Valentin said of Trump, most of them “to make a buzz” and get attention.

Kristin Nichols, 60, of Palm Springs, who was visiting with family, said that as someone who is part Chickasaw she was particularly moved by the exhibits about the Native American occupation.

“The amount of money it would take to do this…” she said. “I would question the purpose.”

She added: “It’s a historic place, and if they turn it back into a prison, it’s going to ruin all the history.”

Advertisement

Politics

Video: Senate Republicans Block Limits to Trump’s War Powers

Published

on

Video: Senate Republicans Block Limits to Trump’s War Powers

new video loaded: Senate Republicans Block Limits to Trump’s War Powers

transcript

transcript

Senate Republicans Block Limits to Trump’s War Powers

Senate Republicans voted against a Democratic bill that would have required President Trump to obtain congressional authorization to continue waging war against Iran.

“The yeas are 47. The nays are 53. The motion to discharge is not approved.” “President Trump decided to attack Iran. That decision was profound, deliberate and correct. The president understands the weight of war.” “Why is Donald Trump hellbent on making history repeat itself? Why is he plunging America headfirst into a war that Americans do not want, and which he cannot even explain? The American people deserve a say, and that is what our resolution is about.”

Advertisement
Senate Republicans voted against a Democratic bill that would have required President Trump to obtain congressional authorization to continue waging war against Iran.

By Shawn Paik

March 5, 2026

Continue Reading

Politics

DHS defends McLaughlin against allegations husband’s company profited millions from ad contracts: ‘Baseless’

Published

on

DHS defends McLaughlin against allegations husband’s company profited millions from ad contracts: ‘Baseless’

NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!

EXCLUSIVE: Newly obtained financial statements shed light on claims that former Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Assistant Secretary Tricia McLaughlin’s husband’s company made millions from a DHS advertising campaign.

DHS Secretary Kristi Noem faced intense questioning during a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing Tuesday, and Sen. John Kennedy, R-La., specifically called out the agency for contracting a public relations firm headed by McLaughlin’s husband, Benjamin Yoho.

“I have personally reviewed the allegations against Ms. McLaughlin, and I find them to be baseless,” DHS General Counsel James Percival told Fox News Digital. “Nothing illegal or unethical occurred with respect to these contracts. Ms. McLaughlin was not involved in selecting any subcontractors.

“She is, however, a superstar in the public affairs world, so I am not surprised that she married a successful businessman whose services were attractive to these outside firms.”

Advertisement

Newly obtained financial statements address allegations that former Department of Homeland Security Assistant Secretary Tricia McLaughlin’s husband’s firm improperly profited from a multimillion-dollar DHS ad campaign. Lawmakers pressed Secretary Kristi Noem over the contracts during a heated Senate hearing. (Jack Gruber/USA Today)

Kennedy alleged that Yoho’s firm, The Strategy Group, “got most of the money” out of what the Louisiana Republican senator says was $220 million in “television advertisements that feature [Noem] prominently.”

“I’m sorry,” Kennedy said. “Safe America Media was a company formed 11 days before you picked them. And that the Strategy Group got most of the money. And the head of that is married to your former spokesperson.”

“It’s just hard for me to believe knowing the president as I do, that you said, ‘Mr. President, here’s some ads I’ve cut, and I’m going to spend $220 million running them,’ that he would have agreed to that,” Kennedy explained. “I don’t think Russ Vought at OMB [Office of Management and Budget] would have agreed to that.”

‘YOU SHOULD BE ASHAMED!’: PROTESTER DRAGGED FROM KRISTI NOEM’S SENATE HEARING

Advertisement

Senate scrutiny intensified over a DHS advertising campaign after Sen. John Kennedy, R-La., questioned whether a firm linked to McLaughlin’s husband benefited unfairly. DHS officials and the company deny any wrongdoing or multimillion-dollar profits. (Andrew Harrer/Bloomberg via Getty Images)

The Strategy Group is a conservative advertising agency for which Yoho serves as CEO.

Figures obtained by Fox News Digital show a slightly lesser total advertising expenditure of approximately $185 million, with a total of roughly $146.5 million going to a campaign called “Save America.”

However, of the total that went to “Save America,” roughly $348,000 went to production costs, while the remaining $142 million went to “media buys.”

Sources at DHS say that media buys are the cost of actually buying the ads themselves, whether purchased from social media or for a TV ad.

Advertisement

Kennedy also alleged that the bidding process for the contracts never took place and that Safe America Media’s recent founding was a cause for concern and collusion between McLaughlin and her husband’s business. 

WATCH THE MOST VIRAL MOMENTS AS KRISTI NOEM’S HEARING GOES OFF THE RAILS

Debate over DHS’ “Save America” ad campaign intensified as senators challenged its costs and contractor ties, even as agency officials touted the initiative as a historic success in promoting self-deportation. (Graeme Sloan/Getty Images)

“Yes they did,” Noem responded during the hearing. “They went out to a competitive bid, and career officials at the department chose who would do those advertising commercials.”

The Strategy Group posted to X Tuesday that it never had a contract with the department. While it did receive several hundred thousand dollars for production costs associated with the advertising campaigns, The Strategy Group never made millions.

Advertisement

“The Strategy Group has never had a contract with DHS,” the post said. “We had a subcontract with Safe America [Media] for limited production services. Safe America paid us $226,137.17 total for 5 film shoots, 45 produced video advertisements and 6 produced radio advertisements.

DHS SPOKESWOMAN TRICIA MCLAUGHLIN TO LEAVE TRUMP ADMIN, SOURCE CONFIRMS

Critics raised concerns about potential conflicts of interest in a high-dollar DHS advertising effort, but department representatives say McLaughlin recused herself and that subcontracting decisions were made independently. (AP Photo/Jose Luis Magana, File)

“If you’re going to try to question our integrity, bring actual evidence — we did,” the post concluded.

Because these ads were purchased using public funds, all contract totals are publicly available. 

Advertisement

Lauren Bis, who took up the role of assistant secretary once McLaughlin left office, told Fox News Digital Tuesday that scrutiny from Republicans and Democrats over the advertising spending was unjustified because the campaigns resulted in “the most successful ad campaign in U.S. history.”

“Sanctuary politicians are attacking this ad campaign because it has been successful in CLOSING our borders and getting more than 2.2 million illegal aliens to LEAVE the U.S.,” Bis said. 

“The DHS domestic and international ad campaign was the most successful ad campaign in U.S. history. The results speak for themselves: 2.2 million illegal aliens self-deported, and we now have the most secure border in American history.”

KRISTI NOEM TO FACE SENATE GRILLING OVER MINNEAPOLIS SHOOTINGS AS DHS SHUTDOWN HITS WEEK 3

The Trump administration reaffirmed that all illegal immigrants are eligible for deportations as they focus on arresting violent criminals first.  (Raquel Natalicchio/Houston Chronicle via Getty Images)

Advertisement

Bis also compared the cost of arresting and deporting an illegal migrant to that of the minimal cost of an illegal migrant self-deporting. The department says the advertising campaign played a key role in marketing self-deportation.

A spokesperson at DHS also told Fox News Digital that contractors decide who they hire, fulfilling the terms of a contract, not the department itself. 

“By law, DHS cannot and does not determine, control or weigh in on who contractors hire or use to fulfill the terms of the contract,” a DHS spokesperson told Fox. “Those decisions are made by the contractor alone. We have only become aware of these companies because of this inquiry and did not hire those companies.”

The spokesperson also noted that McLaughlin “recused herself” from interactions with subcontractors to avoid “any perceived appearance of impropriety.”

“Upon hearing who the subcontractors were for production of the ad, Ms. McLaughlin recused herself from any interaction or engagement with any subcontractors to avoid any perceived appearance of impropriety,” the spokesperson continued. “DHS Office of Public Affairs is the program officer. Ms. McLaughlin oversees the DHS Office of Public Affairs, which is simply the vehicle for this contract.”

Advertisement

Department of Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem takes her seat as she arrives to testify during a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing Tuesday on Capitol Hill in Washington, D.C. (Jim Watson/AFP via Getty Images)

McLaughlin told Fox News Digital the criticism of her and her family by senators at the hearing is a matter of public manipulation.

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

“This is yet another example of politicians intentionally trying to dupe and manipulate the public to try to manufacture division and anger,” McLaughlin told Fox News Digital. “The ad spend and contracts are a matter of public record, and the process was done by the book.

“These politicians would rather smear private citizens and American small businesses than do any basic research.”

Advertisement

Fox News Digital’s Alexandra Koch contributed to this report.

Related Article

DHS defends ad blitz amid Senate scrutiny, says campaign drove 2.2M self-deportations and saved taxpayers $39B
Continue Reading

Politics

Senate rejects war powers measure to withdraw forces from Iran

Published

on

Senate rejects war powers measure to withdraw forces from Iran

Senate Republicans blocked a war powers resolution Wednesday designed to withdraw U.S. forces from hostilities in Iran, as the Trump administration accelerates its military campaign in a conflict that has killed hundreds, including at least six American service members.

The motion failed in a vote of 47-53.

In addition to pulling out military resources from the Middle East, the measure — introduced by Sens. Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.), Adam Schiff (D-Calif.) and Tim Kaine (D-Va.) — would have required Congress’ explicit approval before future engagement with Iran, a power granted to the legislative branch in the Constitution.

The House, where Republicans also hold an advantage, is scheduled to weigh in on a similar measure Thursday. Even if both Democratic-led measures were to succeed, President Trump was widely expected to veto the legislation.

“We are doing very well on the war front, to put it mildly,” President Trump said at a White House event on Wednesday afternoon. The president, who has come under scrutiny for offering shifting explanations on the war’s endgame, said that if he was asked to scale the American military operation from one to 10, he would rate it a 15.

Advertisement

Democrats dispute that Trump possesses the authority to wage the ongoing operation in Iran without explicit congressional approval.

Acknowledging the measure was unlikely to succeed, they framed the vote as a strategy to force lawmakers to put their support for or opposition to the war on record.

“Today every senator — every single one — will pick a side,” Schumer said. “Do you stand with the American people who are exhausted with forever wars in the Middle East, or stand with Donald Trump and Pete Hegseth as they bumble us headfirst into another war?”

Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R-S.D.) and most of his Republican colleagues have maintained that the president carried out a “pre-emptive” and “defensive” strike in Iran, giving him full authority to continue unilateral military operations.

Republicans saw the vote as the “last roadblock” stopping Trump from carrying out his mission against the Islamic Republic.

Advertisement

“I think the president has the authority that he needs to conduct the activities and operations that are currently underway there. There are a lot of controversy and questions around the war powers act, but I think the president is acting in the best interest of the nation and our national security interests,” Thune said at a news conference.

Senators largely held to party loyalties, with the exception of Kentucky Republican Rand Paul, who broke ranks to support the measure, and Pennsylvania Democrat John Fetterman, who opposed it.

The vote comes as Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth said Wednesday that the war against Iran is “accelerating,” with American and Israeli forces expanding air operations into Iranian territory. He pointed to evidence released by U.S. Central Command of a submarine strike on an Iranian warship, and also lauded other strikes throughout the region as civilian casualties in Iran surpassed 1,000 on the fourth day of the conflict, according to rights groups.

“We’re going to continue to do well,” Trump said Wednesday. “We have the greatest military in the world by far and that was a tremendous threat to us for many years. Forty-seven years they’ve been killing our people and killing people all over the world, and we have great support.”

Republicans blocked a similar war powers vote in January after the president ordered U.S. special forces to capture and extradite Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro in Caracas on drug trafficking charges.

Advertisement

GOP leaders argued that the outcome of that mission equated to a quick success in the Middle East, despite an uncertain timeline from the Department of Defense.

In the House, lawmakers will vote on a separate war powers effort Thursday. That bill is led by Rep. Ro Khanna (D-Calif.) and Rep. Thomas Massie (R-Ky.), the two lawmakers who authored the Epstein Files Transparency Act.

“Instead of sending billions overseas, we need to invest in jobs, healthcare, and education here,” Khanna said on X.

In addition to that proposal, moderate Democrats in the House have introduced a separate resolution that would give the administration a 30-day window to justify continued hostilities in the Middle East before requiring a formal declaration of war or authorization from Congress.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Trending