Buck stops where? Tying GSA, Secret Service scandals to President

>>> the latest attempt to connect the white house to the secret service scandal in colombia come via republican senator chuck grassley of iowa. he asked whether the investigation includes white house personnel who are also present in colombia and might have entertained guests of their own. admittedly, this could be a legitimate avenue of inquiry. however, this is the same senator who call the president stupid in a tweet two weeks ago. we've already seen several republicans trying to link this to the white house as well as the gsa scandal. interestingly, it is the republican master of the dark arts , karl rove , who told his gop candidates regarding the gsa scandal to stand down from these wild accusations.

>> sure, it creates a problem for president obama . it adds to the sense that washington is broken. if the republicans try to make this a point in their arguments, player making a big mistake .

>> back with us, has karl rove lost it? i thought the whole point of these campaigns is to take every single experience opportunity and attack the opposition. he's saying no.

>> well, look. i've been very honest on this program as well. you cannot blame the president for gas prices . that's just not fair. and i don't think you can blame the president for the secret service scandal. the gsa thing i think is a little murkier waters. but look, if the white house ignores the secret service issue, doesn't fully investigate it, then i think it is fair to call into question their oversight and leadership over what could have been an incredibly dangerous and damaging moment for this president.

>> just so you know, jay carney , the white house chief press spokesman, said that the white house counsel has conducted their own inquiry already in relation to white house staff .

>> that's good. that's good.

>> therefore, they're doing as you say. professor dyson, given that mr. grassley called the president stupid about two weeks ago, i guess we can't really take any criticism that he offers. and jay carney said today, the white house looked into the matter. said there is no indication of any ill proper behavior.

>> this is just ridiculous. to try to besmirch the president's behavior or suggest that he is connected to this when the very men who are supposed to be protecting him and keeping him out of harm's way were engaged in all kinds of nefarious activities off the books is to really be misled here. i applaud mr. rove for saying this is not the right thing to do. stay out of these murky waters. it ends up resounding negatively back on the republicans. you can be guaranteed the problem is with the democrats. very soon a similar thing can happen to the republicans. if you have your hand in that cookie jar , it will get cut off too.

>> i want you to listen to this. here's one point brought up by two female senators . one republican, one democrat. listen to this.

>> i can't help but wonder if there had been more women as part of that detail. if this ever would have happened.

>> only 11% of the agents are women . and we agree on this. if there were more agents on the ground, maybe we would not have had this.

>> they're right, aren't they?

>> a great point. how often do you see female members of congress having the zipper problems that so many of the men do. and just like as in so many spheres of our public life , having a balance of men and women make for a more effective product, brings a more balanced perspective and is important. so i agree with them there. and going back to that conversation between them, i think that republicans are frankly desperate for the president to have some sort of scandal. and from --

>> you don't think that was a scandal? we've got plenty. we're not desperate.

>> by the standards if you look at my alma the matter, he has not had a scandal for a longer period of time than any president in modern history . the next longest period was following 9/11. so it is no surprise that the republican party who said their number one objective was to get the president out of office, is trying to gin up and find something that they can use that they can talk about.

>> republicans have plenty to work with. they don't have to go to scandals. to susan collins ' point, and i respect her, when it come to the national security of our president, i don't want equality. okay? i don't want this quota amongering. i want the best people protecting our president. so if that happens to be all men, that's fine with me.

>> all the agents were employed with prostitutes. they were otherwise engaged .

>> let's not offend and insult an entire body politic of people who by and large do a great job.

>> indeed they do.

>> by insinuating if there had been women there somehow, these scandals wouldn't happen. i want the best people pregnanting my president. men or women . and i don't like this equality effort.

>> professor, you know the whistle blower was in fact a woman. professor?

>> we don't want patriarchy to speak through a ventriloquist act here. a woman speaking still patriarchal ideas. women are as equally qualified as men. it is not predicated on gender. what they were arguing is that ability of the women toward the task and these. we wouldn't have been as easily seduced by those activities as has proven to be correct might suggest that women bring a different quality than men who might be otherwise distracted. i think we have to be careful not to automatically dismiss women as if they are not equally qualified.

>> i didn't. i said i wanted the most qualified person for the job, male or female. the idea that somehow women are above this stuff. a long list of women --

>> to immoral behavior. we are not above it. trust me.

>> thank you for being so honest.

>> you're arguing against a straw man or a straw woman in this case, no one is saying that a less qualified person should be put in that position. we're just saying that we should open our mind up.

>> is it closed? are women not allowed?

>> i think it has been difficult. thank you so much for joining us. next, we go to the white house . first, amanda has the wrap-up.

>> why don't we look at how stocks are doing. we're starting out the week very much in the red. i