Return to Transcripts main page

Laura Coates Live

House Votes On DHS Bill; Iran Attacks U.S. Air Base In Saudi Arabia; Tiger Woods Arrested. Aired 11p-12a ET

Aired March 27, 2026 - 23:00   ET

THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.

[23:00:00]

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

SARA SIDNER, CNN ANCHOR AND SENIOR NATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Your favorite comedians of "Have I Got News for You" are back this Saturday for the final episode of the season, tomorrow, 9 p.m., on CNN and on CNN app. Thank you for watching "NewsNight." "Laura Coates Live" starts right now.

UNKNOWN (voice-over): This is "CNN Breaking News."

LAURA COATES, CNN HOST AND SENIOR LEGAL ANALYST: Good evening. I'm Laura Coates. A very busy Friday night. We're covering three major breaking stories. Iran has attacked a U.S. air base in Saudi Arabia, injuring at least 10 American service members. An official says a refueling tanker aircraft was also damaged. It comes as the war with Iran is about to hit the one-month mark.

The second big story we're following, the arrest of Tiger Woods on suspicion of a DUI after a rollover car crash in Florida. We now have his mugshot. He is set to be released from custody at any moment, and we'll be live outside the jail.

But first, chaos on Capitol Hill and at America's airports. The 42-day DHS shutdown doesn't look like it's ending any time soon. That's because House Republicans rejected a Senate deal that would have funded most of the department except for ICE and Border Patrol. The House is voting right now on their own plan to fund the whole department, and that will kick it back to the Senate. But, as you know, senators have already skipped town on a two-week recess.

Now, the shutdown has sparked massive lines at airports and hundreds of TSA resignations. But President Trump has ordered DHS to pay TSA agents. The department says paychecks could go out as early as Monday.

COATES: I'm joined by the ranking member of the House Armed Services Committee, Democratic Congressman Adam Smith. Congressman, thank you. You just voted no against this bill. Senator Chuck Schumer said that it will be dead on arrival in the Senate. So, are we just back at square one again?

REP. ADAM SMITH (D-WA): It seems that way. To be technically accurate, I voted no on the previous question. The actual bill is coming up next. But yes -- no -- look -- I mean, Republicans refused to accept the deal that would have reopened TSA. We have a disagreement on how to do immigration enforcement in this country. We Democrats think that disagreement is pretty important after what happened in Minneapolis and elsewhere: Two American citizens killed by ICE agents, warrantless searches, you know, probable cause being ignored, due process being ignored, the rights of Americans being violated all across the country.

But we are practical about it. We do not want to drag TSA or the Coast Guard or FEMA into this. We want to isolate the argument over ICE and Border Patrol. So, we've offered for quite some time, fund everything else. Let's have the argument about ICE and Border Patrol. That's what the Senate did in a unanimous bipartisan vote, by the way. Every single Republican agreed to it as well. That would have funded TSA right now.

Mike Johnson refused to even allow a vote on that. Instead, he's voting on what is essentially the same thing that the House has voted on twice before over the course of the last month and a half, sent to the Senate, and the Senate has been unable to pass.

So, we had a path right in front of us. Just all the House has to do, bring it up. Republicans would have voted for that. It would be off to the president, and TSA would be being funded within hours. The Republicans chose not to do that.

COATES: Well, congressman, the president has ordered via an executive order for TSA workers to be paid as early as Monday. Do you support not only that decision, but also the path that he is choosing to get to that decision?

SMITH: Well, I support getting TSA agents paid, to be sure. Now, as I said, we have a perfectly legal option right here in front of us in the House. The problem with what President Trump is doing is twofold.

Number one, it's illegal. He can't simply decide to spend money without congressional approval. Now, he has done that dozens of times in the last 14 months. The courts frequently strike down that spending as being illegal as it is. So, that's a problem. And the other problem is how dependable are these funds. I confess I have not seen the math in terms of how much money we're talking about here. So, those are the two problems.

And, again, easy solution in front of us. What the Republicans are really doing is they're trying to leverage TSA to try to keep their border enforcement and immigration enforcement unchanged. The two should not be related. Speaker Johnson is relating them, and that's hurting airports and certainly hurting TSA agents, the Coast Guard, FEMA, and a number of other parts of our budget.

COATES: I want to turn to the war in Iran, congressman, because we have learned that at least 10 U.S. troops were injured in an attack on a base in Saudi Arabia and also a U.S. tanker was damaged.

[23:05:02]

Do you know anything about the state of their injuries? SMITH: We do not. We've got the report that you got. I was briefed by actually Chairman Caine today. And yes, that was confirmed. Those injuries happened. Two, apparently, are serious. We don't know anything more than that.

But it certainly shows that even after four weeks of what is -- has been a very successful bombing campaign, cannot argue with the fact that we have hit a lot of targets. It just points up that you can reduce Iran's military capability. You can't eliminate it, particularly in the age of cheap one-way attack drones. All they have to do is maintain, you know, some number of those, and they can place our troops and also our partners and allies in the region at risk.

That's what's so problematic about where this war is at right now. How does it end? You're not going to, apparently, eliminate Iran's ability. So, what is the goal the president is trying to achieve with this war right now?

COATES: I, of course, like others, are very fixated on the end of a war. Secretary Marco Rubio says the war will continue for a few more -- he says weeks, not months, his words, and without any boots on the ground. Listen to this.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

MARCO RUBIO, UNITED STATES SECRETARY OF STATE: We're going to destroy their factories that make missiles and rockets and drones, we're going to destroy their navy, we're going to destroy their air force, and we are going to significantly destroy their missile launchers so they can never hide behind these things to get a nuclear weapon. We can achieve. We are achieving all those objectives, we are ahead of schedule on most of them, and we can achieve them without any ground troops, without any.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

COATES: Now, based on the information you've been briefed on, congressman, is his assessment accurate that no boots on the ground are needed?

SMITH: Well, I think for what he just said, that's probably true, if you want to degrade Iran's capability, to be sure. But I don't agree with his point about this will eliminate the threat and this will make sure that Iran can't pursue a nuclear weapon. They'll maintain their ballistic missile capacity to some degree and their drone capacity to some degree. They will be protected from that.

So, I don't know that we accomplished the ultimate objective. The ultimate objective is to stop Iran from ever getting a nuclear weapon, to stop their ballistic missile program, and to stop their support for proxies in the region. Even another two, three weeks of bombing, I don't see that we get to that point.

Now, from what I've heard from briefings we've got this week, it seems like the Trump administration is not inclined to use ground troops. So, that's good news. But I question whether or not the bombing campaign is going to achieve the objectives that started this war in the first place.

COATES: You know, congressman, I sat down with a colleague of yours, a Republican colleague, Congresswoman Nancy Mace. She expressed frustration over what she learned at a classified briefing just earlier this week. Listen.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

REP. NANCY MACE (R-SC): I think the objectives on what's going on today need to be clarified both for the American public and for Congress.

COATES: Were you surprised by what you learned today?

MACE: I was very surprised and disappointed. Is it right to go into a protracted, elongated war where soldiers are going to die? And right now, I am adamantly opposed to boots on the ground based on the information that I have.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

COATES: Congressman, what is the administration telling you behind closed doors that does not line up with their public messaging?

SMITH: Well, the only thing I'd disagree with what Representative Mace said there was the surprised part. None of this is particularly surprising. I mean, we've been wargaming this for 15 years. OK? What can we achieve if we attack Iran?

And the concern has always been while you can certainly hit some targets and you can degrade them significantly, the Iranian regime was likely to stay in place, likely to maintain some capacity, and likely to threaten our troops and our partners and allies in the region in precisely the way that we have.

Nancy Mace has served on the Armed Services Committee. None of this should have been surprising. She should have voted against this war when she had the chance because we all knew this was the direction that it was going to go. And behind closed doors, we're hearing basically what we've talked about here, is what Marco Rubio said.

Now, when you ask the question, how is this military campaign going to ultimately break the Iranian regime and stop them from being the threat that we had before this, that's where there is a lack of detail, and that lack of detail comes from the fact there's no real path to achieving that. Even some number of boots on the ground would be unlikely to be able to topple this regime.

COATES: You know, Mace had been very adamant that the administration must go to Congress before any troops set foot on Iran. Now, I wonder from your perspective and based on what we have seen, do you believe the administration would go to Congress before any boots are on the ground, let alone troops setting foot in Iran?

SMITH: Absolutely not. I mean, the Trump administration has made it clear that they are going to walk over Congress any chance they get. [23:10:03]

And Mike Johnson has made it --

COATES: So, what can you do about that?

SMITH: Well, I was going to say, Mike Johnson has made it clear that he's going to let them. We -- there's a lot we could do about that if the speaker of the House and the Republicans in Congress wanted to stand up for the rights of Congress, even on the spending issue. I mean, President Trump has cut spending that we approved, and we have been blocked in any effort to try to reverse that.

So, there's a lot we could do if the Republicans were willing to give us those votes. I mean, even today, we could be paying TSA agents legally if the Republicans would just give us a vote on what a bipartisan group in the Senate passed.

COATES: You know, a U.S. source is telling Axios that Vice President J.D. Vance has doubts over Israel's analysis of how the conflict would play out. And I'm quoting here. "Before the war, Bibi really sold it to the president as being easy, as regime change being a lot likelier than it was. and the VP was clear-eyed about some of those statements." Can -- do you have an idea about what this dynamic is like behind closed doors or how this is playing out in a way that's impacting this war, let alone the troops?

SMITH: Yes, it's incredibly frustrating because we've been down this road before, all right, with Saddam Hussein in Iraq, with the Taliban in Afghanistan, with Muammar Gaddafi in Libya. And there's always those people who say, yes, we'll just go in with the military, we'll take them out, we'll be able to replace it with exactly what we want. On paper, fine. But what we should have learned -- because we've been through this. This isn't just happening. Three times, we've been through this.

And also, as I mentioned, we've been briefed specifically on Iran for some time. So, Netanyahu definitely wanted this war against Iran. But we don't have to believe him. We're the United States of America. If the administration looks at him and says, OK, you say this is going to be easy, yes, you're wrong because we know you're wrong. So, yes, sure, Netanyahu made that case. The better question is, why did President Trump and Marco Rubio and everybody so willingly fall in line when we've got 25 years-worth of lessons now that should have taught us better?

COATES: Congressman Adam Smith, thank you for joining.

SMITH: Thanks, Laura.

COATES: Still ahead, the breaking news on Tiger Woods, currently in jail in Florida on charges of DUI after crashing his car. His release is coming at any moment. Our own Randi Kaye is waiting outside the jail with a live update. Plus, what was going on in Tiger's life before the crash and could this charge actually land him in serious trouble? Insight tonight from someone who has covered Tiger his entire career, next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[23:15:00]

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

COATES: We've just gotten Tiger Woods's mugshot after he was arrested on suspicion of driving under the influence. This is his overturned Land Rover in the middle of the road on Jupiter Island, Florida. The sheriff says he was driving erratically and flipped his car when he tried to overtake a truck that was towing a trailer. Now, apparently, he wasn't hurt and neither was the truck driver, but Woods was taken to jail after refusing a urine test.

Now, of course, this is not the first time the legendary golfer has found himself in this very kind of situation. Remember, he was arrested on a DUI back in 2017. He nearly lost his leg in 2021 after a rollover crash in Los Angeles.

I want to bring in CNN's Randi Kaye, who is outside the jail where Woods is being held. We've seen his mugshot now, Randi. I mean, he should be getting out at any moment. What is the sheriff saying happened?

RANDI KAYE, CNN NATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Yes, it appears, Laura, that he was just released from jail. There were a bunch of -- a couple of cars that just went by, and it does appear that that was him leaving the jail. They have eight hours here in the state of Florida by law to hold him for a suspicion of DUI. So, that would put it about 11:00 p.m. by the time he was taken into custody. So, that would be about now.

But this all started about 2:00 p.m. this afternoon on a very narrow road called South Beach Road where Tiger Woods, according to authorities, was following behind this truck which was pulling this small trailer. And when the truck tried to slow down and turn into a driveway, he said -- the driver told authorities that he could see the Land Rover speeding up behind him, and authorities say that indeed was Tiger Woods. He tried to swerve. He ended up clipping that truck, and then the -- his Land Rover tipped over, rolled over on the driver's side. So, Tiger Woods actually had to escape the car through the passenger side. But they did say that he did show signs of impairment at the scene, and he was driving erratically. And here's a little bit more from the sheriff today.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SHERIFF JOHN BUDENSIEK, SHERIFF, MARTIN COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE: Breathalyzer test, blew triple zeros. But when it came time for us to ask for a urinalysis test, he refused. He has a right to refuse that test. There is a Florida statute which he will be charged with for refusing to take that test, but we will never get definitive results as to what he was impaired on at the time of the crash.

(END VIDEO CLIP) KAYE: So, it's unclear what, if anything, Tiger Woods did have in his system. But according to the sheriff now, given that he did not take that urinalysis test, they may never know. Laura?

COATES: This isn't new for Tiger Woods, right? I mean, this is -- what? The fourth car-related incident he has been in?

KAYE: Yes. It goes back to 2009 when his car, the car that he was driving, hit a fire hydrant and a tree. And then in 2017, he was found asleep at the wheel, and he was arrested and charged with a DUI.

[23:19:55]

And then in 2021, in Los Angeles, he had that single car rollover incident where he was heading downhill in his own car, and he nearly lost his leg in that incident. And then we have today where he's charged with a DUI, property damage, and refusing to take -- refusing to submit to a lawful test. Laura?

COATES: Randi Kaye, thank you so much. I want to bring in veteran sports analyst Bob Harig. He is the author of three books about Tiger Woods, including one that comes out later this year called "Tiger V. Jack." Well, Bob, I mean, no one wants to see this headline from Tiger Woods. It's sad that we're here --

BOB HARIG, SPORTS ANALYST, AUTHOR, SENIOR WRITER AT SPORTS ILLUSTRATED: No.

COATES: -- again. What did you think when you first heard the news?

HARIG: Yes. Well, when I first heard, we didn't know how serious it was. And, of course, your thoughts immediately go to, you know, is he injured? Is anybody else injured? You know, the last time he was involved in a car crash, it was really bad. He's fortunate that he survived that, actually. He still has injuries from that that he's dealing with to this day, his lower right leg. So, that was the first thought.

And then, you know, then you obviously, you're wondering, well, what happened? And as you just reported there with the sheriff in Martin County, you know, they -- they believed him to be impaired, and -- and yet it wasn't alcohol-related.

And look, Tiger has been dealing with -- he has had at least seven back surgeries in the -- in the last 12 years. He has had those multiple surgeries on his lower right leg. We, frankly, don't even know how many. And all of that adds up to a lot of pain. And, you know, the 2017 incident that you noted, you know, there were a lot of different painkillers in his system after that. Some were sleep aids. Some were pain. So, obviously, it's fair to wonder if this is the same thing that we're talking about here.

Just the other night, Tiger was -- was public. He was at -- at -- at his -- at TGL, which is the indoor golf league that he founded. He was asked if he's going to play in the Masters in two weeks. And he talked about how his body is different every day, and it doesn't recover like it used to, and some days are better than others. That's because he -- he just recently, again, in October, had another back procedure. He had a -- he had a disc replacement surgery.

So, you know, all these things add up to what he has been enduring, you know, for years now. And, obviously, we wonder now if it led to what happened today.

COATES: I wonder -- I mean, given all that we've even described and talked about right now, many people would look at Tiger Woods. They -- they see a legend. They see the ebbs and flows of his career, his personal life as well, obviously, every incident you just described, and the recent surgeries. And -- and there had been some speculation at one point that he may try and play at the Masters in, like, two weeks down in Augusta.

What was his attitude towards the game at this point after all that his body has had to endure and all the -- the limelight that has been unflattering as well? What do you make of his mental approach to the game and his fame?

HARIG: Yes. I mean, the actual part of the game is tough. I mean, Tiger has had difficulty playing in the last several years since that 2021 car crash. It was remarkable that he even came back 14 months later. He made the cut at the Masters in 2022, but he has just not been able to sustain any consistency. He didn't play at all last year. He actually blew out his Achilles about a year ago this time. So, that knocked him out for the whole year, and then he had another back procedure. You know, he just had a hard time staying healthy and getting to the point.

And, look, to try to be competitive, he's -- he's 50 years old. You know, the guys he would try to compete against are 10, 15, 20 years younger than him. Tiger still has an immense talent. He -- he has got plenty of skill still, but even he has a hard time overcoming the inability to practice and play consistently.

COATES: You know, a columnist, Eamon Lynch, from Golfweek wrote -- quote -- "Tiger Woods deserves empathy but needs to show responsibility, too." I wonder how his public image will be impacted by all of these. Bob, I look forward to your book. Thank you so much for joining us.

HARIG: Thank you.

COATES: I want to turn to criminal defense attorney, Alexandra Kazarian. Thank you so much. I mean, one thing that sticks in my mind, we just heard about -- obviously, he has been released now.

ALEXANDRA KAZARIAN, CRIMINAL DEFENSE ATTORNEY: All the things that happened.

COATES: He has -- he has refused to take a urine test which, obviously, is distinct from a breathalyzer. But his refusal, the sheriff says, essentially means that they're never going to know whether, in fact, he was under the influence of something. Talk to me a little bit about how the law works in this capacity. [23:24:59]

If he refuses the test, what's the penalty and how do you prove otherwise?

KAZARIAN: Well, that's exactly the point. So, refusing a chemical test anywhere in the U.S. is a crime in and of itself because it makes it impossible for prosecutors to prove that you truly were under the influence of something at the time that you crashed. And so, the way that they get around that is in most jurisdictions, if you refuse to take that chemical test, the -- like here, it's the DMV. Whoever is the administrative force will take your license for a year, whether you are convicted of anything or not.

COATES: Because it's consciousness of guilt.

KAZARIAN: It is consciousness of -- of guilt, and your privilege to drive is not a right. It has been determined that we do not have the right to drive a car. It is a privilege that we hold. And in every jurisdiction, you sign a contract when you get your license that says, if a law enforcement agency asks me to take a chemical test, I will. And if I don't, I will have my license revoked for at least a year, up to 18 months for a second time.

COATES: Well, there are some who would look at this and say, well, look, why -- you know, you have the responsibility, government. You have the burden of proof. I don't have to prove that I'm innocent. I can decline to take the test. And I shouldn't just be automatically determined as having been under the influence. Is there a way? Given that this is for statutory at this point, could he beat this by his refusal?

KAZARIAN: He could because what is a prosecutor going to argue to a jury? Look, he was driving crazy and he crashed. OK. There's plenty of people every single day that drive crazy and crash sober.

COATES: And the mugshot doesn't do anything to buttress.

KAZARIAN: It -- it doesn't. It's all circumstantial evidence. But when it comes down to it, any credible, any good defense attorney is going to say, circumstantial evidence does not a conviction make. You have to be convinced beyond a reasonable doubt. And is it reasonable to believe that somebody like Tiger Woods could be tired while he's driving, could be in a rush while he's driving, distracted while he's driving? Is there any other explanation that leads to innocence that it could be instead of DUI? And if there's even one, then a jury has to vote not guilty. That's why they make it so hard.

COATES: Does his past incidents, does that help a prosecution of the case or are these looked at as separate and distinct?

KAZARIAN: It -- it all comes down to what a judge determines because the defense is going to argue that that has nothing to do with this and that it is way too --

COATES: Prejudicial. KAZARIAN: -- prejudicial. Thank you very much. And, exactly, that a jury should be looking at the circumstances of this situation and not his past. But a judge could. A judge could say, I'm going to give an instruction to the jury that tells them this is not for the guilt, but it's to determine whether there's a pattern here. And so, it could, it could be used against him.

COATES: Alexandra, thanks so much. Alexandra Kazarian, everyone. Next, has lasting damage to TSA already been done? Hear directly from someone on the front lines of this political storm, a TSA agent who warns the toll it has taken on her and her colleagues cannot be easily fixed. Plus, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth reportedly blocking the promotions of women and officers of color. Is what he reportedly did even legal? And later, inside CPAC where the war in Iran has MAGA on edge but also divided.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNKNOWN: When it comes to Iran, how do you feel about that?

UNKNOWN: I'm not happy. I'm not happy at all. I mean, President Trump ran on no new wars.

UNKNOWN: What do you think of the war with Iran at the moment?

UNKNOWN: Unfortunately, I think it's necessary.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[23:30:00]

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

COATES: Breaking news, the House just passed their bill to fund all of DHS, including ICE and Border Patrol. But it's going to be DOA in the Senate, apparently. So, Congress is effectively back to the stalemate that has caused the chaos at America's airports. The goal was to ease those long lines at TSA checkpoints because agents have been working without pay for more than a month. But the early morning vote in the Senate left House Republicans fuming and calling out their own party.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

MIKE JOHNSON, SPEAKER OF THE UNITED STATES HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES: What they're doing is they're placing the burden on the Republican Party entirely to make sure that we have border security funding and immigration and customs Enforcement.

SEN. CHIP ROY (R-TX): I mean, could the Senate be any more lazy than to send to us a bill that doesn't do the job and then leave town?

REP. LISA MCCLAIN (R-MI): So, they're going to stay out on recess for two weeks and not come back while people don't get paid? That's pretty sad. (END VIDEO CLIP)

COATES: President Trump did order DHS to pay TSA agents as early as Monday. So, there may be some potential relief if those payments go through. My next guest has been working for 41 days without pay. Rebecca Wolfe is a TSA officer and president of the TSA union that represents more than 4,000 employees in several western states. Rebecca, thank you for being here. You know, the president says that TSA employees like you will get paid. He's ordering DHS to do it. But do you have any idea when you'll actually get paid again?

REBECCA WOLF, PRESIDENT, AFGE TSA LOCAL 1127: Hello. Thank you for having me. So, the rumor is we could see checks as early as Monday. For the partial paycheck that we received on February 28th, we should see the rest of that paycheck, and then our next two pay periods that we've missed. I don't hold my breath.

[23:34:58]

It's -- that's a lot for them to get done within just a couple days. And there were issues last time trying to get people paid.

COATES: You have four kids, you have two grandchildren, and you're about to miss another paycheck potentially. I have to understand how this is impacting your family. I mean, how are you able to make ends meet?

WOLF: Door dashing. My son helps with that. And we rely on food banks. We rely on the gift cards that have been generously donated from our communities for gas and foods. And that's how -- that's exactly how we've been surviving, the kindness of others.

COATES: What is that doing to the morale? I mean, you are a union head. What are you hearing about why people even continue to come to work, let alone those who have said, I can't do it anymore?

WOLF: I think, at first, everybody had that hope, that they wouldn't torture us or hold us hostage like they did last time. There was that hope. But all of these officers nationwide took an oath to protect and serve, and they take that to heart. That's something we don't take lightly. And so, these officers are showing up out of their integrity, and because they've chosen this as a career. You don't want to give up on that. But it is breaking down the morale. It is breaking individuals down mentally and emotionally, and that impacts the physical aspect of everything.

Tensions at home, depending on what's going on, I feel it in my home, you know? When you're trying to explain we can't do this, this, and this, even though -- you know, a couple of my children at home are adults. I still have a teenager. He understands, but he doesn't understand, if that makes sense. Well, can't we do it? I'm like, no, because I don't see an end in sight, unfortunately.

And without a promise of anything beyond just our back pay by this executive order, I'm worried. Even if they had the continued resolution until the end of May, then we're going to be right back here in May doing it again. And I don't know how many officers, including myself, can withstand another shutdown. This is a lot, a lot to take on.

COATES: The unfairness of it. Rebecca Wolf, thank you so much for sharing. I hope people really understand the faces, the families, the sacrifices behind every single one of these decisions. Rebecca Wolf, thank you.

Up next, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth reportedly blocking two women and two Black officers from being promoted to general. An unprecedented move that's raising serious questions inside and outside the Pentagon. Retired Admiral Nancy Lacore, who was pushed out by Hegseth last year and is now running for Congress, will be live with me tonight for her reaction. That's next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[23:40:00]

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

COATES: Breaking news out of Florida. Tiger Woods has officially been released from jail after his arrest on suspicion of DUI after he crashed his car today. On the left, his mugshot. On the right, a picture of him in a car leaving the jail in Martin County, Florida. The sheriff says he passed a breathalyzer test, but did not agree to taking a urine test. Woods will also face charges of property damage and refusal to submit to a lawful test.

Now, to the news out of the Pentagon from "The New York Times." The Times reports that senior officials are questioning if there is race and gender bias in the Defense Department as Secretary Hegseth reportedly went out of his way to block the promotions of two Black and two female officers.

Let me explain. There's a list of about three dozen officers up for promotion to general and most of whom are white men. The Times says Hegseth pressured army leaders for months to remove four of them. But he faced pushback over their record of exemplary service. So, Hegseth struck the names off the list himself. I should note, a few Black and female officers are still on the promotion list. And while the Pentagon did not directly address the Times's reporting, they did say -- quote -- "Under Secretary Hegseth, military promotions are given to those who have earned them."

My next guest is a former three-star admiral who served as chief of the Navy Reserve. She says Hegseth removed her from her position without cause. She's now running for Congress as a Democrat in South Carolina. Retired Rear Admiral Nancy Lacore joins me now. Admiral, thank you for being here. Do you share the concerns of these senior officials who tell "The New York Times" that there could be race and gender bias at play here?

REAR ADM. NANCY LACORE, RETIRED REAR ADMIRAL AT U.S. NAVY, SOUTH CAROLINA CONGRESSIONAL CANDIDATE: I -- I absolutely do. I mean, it's infuriating just to watch Pete Hegseth continue on his path of removing highly qualified senior military officials. I can tell you that, over the course of my 35 years, I've sat on probably close to 40 promotion boards, and they are 100 percent merit-based, especially those that you are looking to promote to the flag and general officer level.

[23:45:01]

Hundred percent merit-based. There's no discussion about race or gender. And I don't know what made Pete Hegseth think that he knows better, he's a better judge of leadership than these boards.

COATES: Is it normal for a secretary of defense --

LACORE: I mean, I think if you go back to --

COATES: Excuse me. Look, is it normal for a secretary of defense to even weigh in like this as opposed to the boards?

LACORE: Look, my understanding is, you know, the secretary has the option to either wholesale approve it or wholesale disapprove it, but not remove names from the list. That's my understanding. So -- but now that he has, I think that move just undermines the sanctity of the promotion board process across the entire department. That's something that has been well respected and revered and, like I said, 100 percent merit-based. And now, he's throwing some question into that process, and I think that is going to have a significant ripple effect across the force.

COATES: You know, Hegseth said back in September that the military has become too woke, and he would focus on merit over diversity for promotions. But by all accounts, these officers were -- they were more than qualified. So, what message do you think that sends to our service members?

LACORE: Well, I think that is the question. Like, what is the message that it is sending to women and to Black service members, even to young Americans who are thinking about service? I mean, I think the message is, you're not wanted, you're not welcome, you're not qualified, and your service isn't valued. And I think that is going to have an effect for many, many years to come on our military.

COATES: This is not happening in a vacuum. There's a war right now. And I want to talk about Iran for a moment because retired Army general, Stanley McChrystal, he had this to say about Hegseth's rhetoric.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

GEN. STANLEY MCCHRYSTAL, RETIRED ARMY GENERAL, U.S. ARMY (voice-over): I had the honor and opportunity to serve with some of the most elite forces. People who really did some extraordinary things, but they didn't beat their chest about it. And they weren't braggadocios. And they didn't talk about, yes, we love killing people. That's just not the way they behaved. Now, the danger, though, of some of that verbiage now is much of the force is 18 years old, and it's influenceable. (END VIDEO CLIP)

COATES: People have also taken issue with the war memes the White House has put out. Has the tone bothered you?

LACORE: Yes. Absolutely. I think the celebration of battlefield victories is kind of misguided and somewhat immature. And I think Secretary Hegseth's time would be better spent putting out the strategic guidance that the force needs right now.

COATES: Admiral Nancy Lacore, thank you.

LACORE: You're welcome. Thanks for having me.

COATES: The war with Iran is exposing some real cracks within the Republican Party, a rift that's on full display at the annual gathering of conservatives known as CPAC.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

STEVE BANNON, FORMER WHITE HOUSE CHIEF STRATEGIST: Your sons, daughters, granddaughters, grandsons could be on Kharg Island.

MATT GAETZ, FORMER FLORIDA REPRESENTATIVE: A ground invasion of Iran will make our country poorer and less safe.

RICHARD GRENELL, SPECIAL ENVOY: I think we're going to look back in a couple of months and say, thank God that we fixed this problem. The Iranian regime is not a threat any longer.

(APPLAUSE)

ERIK PRINCE, AMERICAN BUSINESSMAN AND INVESTOR: My real concern is that if they try to put boots on the ground, force the Strait of Hormuz, you will see imagery of burning American warships in the next couple of weeks.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

COATES: Let's bring in the panel, Democratic strategist Dave Jacobson and conservative commentator Elisha Cross -- Krauss, excuse me. Glad to have both of you here. I want to begin with you, Elisha, because one CPAC participant told our own Donie O'Sullivan that they might sit out of the midterms -- sit out of the midterms because of the war with Iran. And another told the AP that the war is a betrayal, their words. Is the war the issue that might break the coalition that has served, frankly, Republicans and MAGA well?

ELISHA KRAUSS, WRITER, COMMENTATOR: No. I actually think that the polling shows otherwise. And I think that the people that are attending CPAC are really diehard, few and far between that do not represent the broader constituency of the Republican Party or the MAGA base at this point. They are the most kind of radicals that are listening to the crazies of the Candace Owens, the Megyn Kellys, the Tucker Carlsons, and not actually adherent to the core principles or conservative --- of conservatism or, I would even argue, don't have any core principles of conservatism.

You had a lot of teen CPAC attendees that actually were confused and frustrated by the speakers and by what they were spewing from the podium.

[23:50:00]

And you had a lot of empty seats there as well. I think it's because, unfortunately, over the last specifically five to 10 years, CPAC has moved to, I think, the clickbait type of speakers and not the people that speak for the core of the Republican Party or the conservative movement.

COATES: Well, many who voted for Trump spoke about one core issue that he campaigned on, which is the idea that they would put America first and that essentially no new wars. If there are concerns about the idea of the war happening or a betrayal to either of his campaign statements, how do Democrats look at that issue? Is this an opportunity for them or is this one, as Elisha is indicating, is one that should not be overemphasized?

DAVE JACOBSON, DEMOCRATIC STRATEGIST: I think he's clearly soured with components of his base. And you're seeing that in the polling, right? Like, Reuters put out a poll this week. Sixty-two percent of Americans disapprove of the president. Fox News put out a poll. Fifty-nine percent disapprove. But of that, 47 very strongly disapprove. The intensity there is what matters, right?

And you're seeing that also in almost every single special election. Since he was sworn in for Trump 2.0, almost 99 percent, maybe it's 100 percent, Democrats have won these special elections. In fact, in Donald Trump's backyard in Mar-a-Lago this week, a Democrat running for state legislature in Florida flipped a seat red to blue.

And on the war, I'll tell you, I saw a poll in the AP just today, 63 percent of Republicans support dropping bombs on targeted military sites in Iran. Forty-seven percent of Republicans oppose sending ground troops. That is stunning and shocking at a time when you see the administration contemplating putting boots on the ground in a war that is among the most unpopular wars in American history.

COATES: You know, there are thousands of "no kings" protests that are planned for tomorrow with millions of people who are expected to attend, frankly. This will be the third protest event that they have actually put on. And last year, seven million people protested. I mean, Democrats are not in power. Republicans control both the House and the Senate. There has been no real change to any policies yet. There's the grappling with the TSA issues and beyond. I mean, what do you think Democrats are hoping to get out of tomorrow? And then I want to ask you, what you think Republicans can glean?

JACOBSON: I think it's an organizing opportunity. It's an opportunity to channel the frustration and the anxiety that people across this country are feeling. It's an opportunity to get under Donald Trump's skin and send a message that we want change. A protest don't necessarily translate to elections. But Democrats and the resistance need to keep this moment, keep this pressure on. And, frankly, you're seeing bipartisan bills like we saw this morning or last night in the Senate.

I think the country and leaders in the Republican -- some leaders in the Republican Party, at least in the Senate, are getting the sense that voters are fed up, TSA in particular, right?

COATES: What about younger voters? Both Democrats and Republicans try to seize upon those voters, particularly those who have not -- they've not been disenfranchised, they just have not participated before. And you mentioned three people, at least, who have appeal in the so-called clickbait era. They have great appeal to younger voters who are getting their sea legs, right?

I wonder how Republicans ought to see these protests or particularly how they impact younger voters who may be looking at the TSA issues, the war with Iran and beyond, and finding or maybe making the assessment that whoever is in power is not working for them. What do you do as a Republican to counteract that?

KRAUSS: Yes. I think that, actually, it's not just the crazies on the left or the crazies on the right who are speaking to those people, it's staid groups that have been consistent in the movement for a very long time like Young America's Foundation, college Republican organizations across the country, Turning Point USA. The list can go on and on. That is giving young people resources to actually understand the importance of American exceptionalism and the core principles of conservatism.

And I think that, yes, there could be loud noises on social media, but that the -- there's not -- I don't think that there's a draw of young people on the right to a "no kings" protest, for example, especially when they see, I think, kind of the radicalism that comes from those types of events, of the shutting down of the 101, of us having to barricade an entire city, of sometimes there having to be curfews put in place.

I'm all for the First Amendment, and I love to see people left, right, and center operating and exercising that right, but I think that, actually, it tends to turn out that it makes Republicans look a little better when people, instead of turning out to vote, just are constantly seen as being complainers instead of actual doers with answers to the problems that young people are facing and affordability, being able to find jobs, being able to purchase a home, school choice, the list can go on and on, are things that Democrats have not provided young people answers with.

[23:55:02]

COATES: And yet, many are looking and saying the party in power is not giving the clarity as well. We'll see. As you both know, protest doesn't always translate to votes, neither does sometimes the rhetoric. We'll see what happens. Dave, Alicia, thank you both so much.

A quick programming note. I had the pleasure of being on "Real Time with Bill Maher" tonight. We had a great conversation with Bill and Stephen A. Smith. You can watch the full episode on CNN tomorrow night at 8:00 p.m. Eastern or you can stream it right now on HBO Max. Oh, I like her jacket. Thank you all for watching. "The Story Is with Elex Michaelson" is next.

(LAUGHTER)

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)