None of them get out of bed in the morning and say, let's not secure the border.

Would they even get an interview if they have had a security violation to the nature of what Secretary Clinton did?

Within the FBI, under your leadership, let's say your chief of staff or your deputy director mishandled Classified information in the same way that you know about, what would be the security and administrative consequences that you would…

To be clear, this is not to suggest that in similar circumstances a person who engaged in this activity would face no consequences.

I served in the Air Force to 26 years.

But if there is markings, you either are making a marking on an Unclassified system of a Classified nature, which is disturbing in and of itself, or you are physically moving it electronically.

If an airman in the Air Force had conducted behavior similar to Secretary Clinton's, I am confident, at a minimum, they would lose their clearance.

That is a pretty dismal number.

So did I misunderstand that 6 percent and 94 percent?

I mean this seems like a gaping hole. We have done better sharing information across Federal agencies, but where we are really missing is Federal down to State and local, and then with the private sector is the real gaping hole.

So if I hear you, I mean, Russia is a concern now due to lack of cooperation, mostly, lack of insight into what is really going on, whether there is positive control or not. Is that fair?