>

Ok, this deserves an investigation also.  At least in this instance the perpetrator is complying with investigators.
At the highest levels of classification, there are special rooms you have to use and all sorts of special procedures. 
At lower levels, these might be briefings written specifically for the person who has them, that just happen to include information from a spy or something. So it's very easy for no one to notice classified docs are missing.
Especially for the President or Vice President, so much is classified that I suspect it's pretty easy for things to get lost in the fray. 
I don't blame either person for having classified docs in general, the issue is when they are high-level Top Secret and left unsecured, and especially if you refuse to return them. 
The solution has to be that someone from the archives comes to review every document removed from the White House during a transition of power and signs off before they can leave. That's a lot of work but only every 4-8 years. You have to stop it from happening, ramping up punishments isn't going to do anything. >

It can be a lot less than that. During the Clinton email saga, one of the documents that was labeled classified was a call sheet for the Secretary of State. The classified material was that she was going to call a newly elected African leader to congratulate them. 
Low level classifications are a joke and are treated as a joke. It’s one of the reasons for Director Comey’s famous “no reasonable prosecutor would ever try to prosecute this”.

But a 2012 email released by the State Department appears to challenge that claim because it carries a classified code known as a “portion marking” - and that marking was on the email when it was sent directly to Clinton’s account.
The “C” - which means it was marked classified at the confidential level - is in the left-hand-margin and relates to an April 2012 phone call with Malawi's first female president, Joyce Banda, who took power after the death of President Mutharika in 2012.
"(C)  Purpose of Call: to offer condolences on the passing of President Mukharika and congratulate President Banda on her recent swearing in."

So after that, I’m just not very excited over prosecuting for classified material. It could be someone’s lunch order. They’re not going to tell you. >

It can be even less of a big deal than that. Sometimes publicly known information can be classified. I’m talking about articles in magazines and newspapers. >

My father works for the air force. Someone in his office once got in trouble for forwarding an email using an unsecured emailed address that included a nyt article discussing classified material. Had to retake a classified material training course. Poor bastard. >

I think the issue is (and this could be wrong) is when they are president their homes/offices are secure locations, and so they’re allowed to bring documents with them. It’s when they leave office not all papers are returned, I would assume because there’s so many of them. I’m not sure how the federal government could improve this though, other than having a team of lawyers with security clearances going through the entire personal residence of a president before they leave office, although that feels a tad invasive. >

A SCIF is only required for Above Top Secret classification, properly called TS/SCI. Though it ideally should be used for TS  documents whenever possible, it is not required, particularly in secure facilities, such as one guarded by the Secret Service (VP's residence and office).
Classifications broadly go Confidential -> Secret -> Top Secret -> TS/SCI. Again only SCI (Sensitive Compartmented Information), requires a SCIF (Sensitive Compartmented Information Facility). 
I would also bet money every VP's residence absolutely has a SCIF inside.
That the Archives wasn't tracking any of these documents that were found, ensures they weren't either TS or TS/SCI. So at worst it was something Secret, but most likely it was something Confidential.
Confidential classification can apply to documents retroactively. Potentially you can be handed a non-classified bar napkin, write out a drawing on it about something that you didn't know was true, just suspected - and the napkin will instantly become Classified if it was true. Its a bit Kafkaesque. 
Like if your kid correctly drew the engine schematic of an alien anti gravity engine, their drawing instantly and retroactively becomes TS/SCI. So in the best case scenario, Biden had some documents that became classified after the fact. Like a health record, or his school grades, or his will, etc. It wasn't classified when written, but the moment he became VP or POTUS, those are now property of the Archives, and minor state secrets.
The critical difference with Trump, is that Biden found all these documents himself (his staff), reported them, and handed them over. Whereas Trump was hounded for 2 years by the Archives to give back what wasn't his, and only after his daily refusals to cooperate (unprecedented), was the FBI sent in to raid his residence. >

This is incorrect.  That may be the case for your job, however, I've handled plenty of classified and secret information, and have only once been in a SCIF.  Quite a bit of information distributed out to the rank an file of the military is classified or secret, and that information is not read in a SCIF by the average soldier. >

DoD troop movements/orders are entirely different than IC stuff. Not to mention, it was already stated that at least some of the documents recovered have been TS/SCI >

Of course classifications in different branches and areas are treated differently.  What the previous poster was saying was that all classified and secret information had to be read only in a SCIF, which is demonstrably and obviously false. >

Biden would have physically handled tens of thousands of classified documents during his time as VP. His staff in the VP office would have handled multiple times this amount.
If they only discovered a handful of docs stored in the wrong place and there's no evidence they were intentionally selected for misplacement, it's actually a good sign that the system to manage classified info is working. Or worked for that specific transition. >

So because there’s not evidence of Biden ordering that classified docs be hidden from the public, you don’t think there’s anything wrong with government officials taking classified docs from office years after they left? Do you also apply this standard to Trump? >

No, that's not what I'm saying. There needs to be an investigation to determine if this is accidental misplacement or something intentional. Plus general counter Intel stuff to see if anyone had access to the documents while they were in Biden's possession as a private citizen and whether or not info was compromised. 
Sure, let's apply the same standard to Trump. But we already know a very different story played out there so far. The most important part being the fact that the government knew the docs were missing, that Trump had them, that Trump refused to return them when asked nicely, that Trump's lawyers lied to the government and claimed they returned everything, then dragged it out to the point where the FBI literally had to raid his home to get the documents they knew he was holding th whole time...
This is not the same story. >

So something that’s a “good sign” requires an in depth special counsel investigation? Sounds like it’s not a good sign to me.
Speaking of comparisons to Trump, do you also assume that Biden and his team lied when I assume they told NARA they turned over everything they had? Didn’t they also have to intentionally remove the docs? If so, it just sounds like NARA is playing politics and only going after certain politicians. In which case Biden broke the law and effectively had a government org cover for him/overlook his crimes. >

"lying" in this instance is distinguished from "making a mistake". There's no evidence one was aware of discrepancy. The other fought to not cooperate with NARA. Five times or so. >

Where’s the evidence Trump lied? Could you cite which source you’re referencing? It stands to reason that Trump had to sign the same docs as Biden, no? >

There’s nowhere in that article that claims that Trump was a signatory or did I miss something?
In addition, are you saying Biden didn’t have to sign similar docs? So there was never any accountability for him in the first place?
I’m just confused where there seems to be 2 standards in this thread- one is that Trump maliciously kept secret docs and lied about it on some official form, and the other being that Biden didn’t lie and for some reason didn’t sign the same exact form? So im looking for answers as to why that is the sentiment held by so many. >


one is that Trump maliciously kept secret docs and lied about it on some official form

yeah that's why he fought NARA. Actually, he's still fighting NARA.  

and the other being that Biden didn’t lie and for some reason didn’t sign the same exact form?

yeah Biden raided himself >

So NARA never knew that Biden had the classified docs? People aren’t required to say they returned classified docs when they leave office?
That’s very troubling, no? 
How did NARA even know about Trumps docs then? What’s the point in NARA if they don’t even know which president has taken which docs? >

By multiple you mean two and we don’t know the classification level. This is post is a cleverly worded post to drag on Biden. 
ignore >

Have someone who's job is it to sign them in and sign them out.  I guess a President is allowed to keep them as long as they want but they should be asked to be returned before they leave.  Or put them on paper that can not be copied and where the ink will be gone in a year.
I'm sure a lot of these things were sensitive at the time but are now declassified like say they pertained to when he got out troops out of Afghanistan. >

Idk what the procedure is when a president & veep leaves the WH. There should be an archivist near the oval with the dedicated job of maintaining documentation. I don't see any impact on whatever Trump has going on, we're not balancing blame here and writing it off. That's not what the DoJ does. >

Phrasing this as "been discovered" really kinda tilts the narrative. Biden's team found these and turned them over of their own accord. This is in comparison to Trump, who refused to turn them over when asked, forcing the FBI to get a warrant.
There are certainly political implications here since Trump team will absolutely try to paint this as being the same thing. But it's nowhere near the same thing. If you really wanted to force the issue, you could make the argument that Biden should be investigated. And I about halfway agree. But don't pretend they're identical. >

This just seems to be human error on the side of all people involved (with exception of trump who was quite honest that all these documents were his preciouses).  Admin staff forget to return something, VEEP sticks something in a drawer, officer forgets a document when briefing.  Just seems like we need tighter controls and whomever is finding all these documents should be hired to do a sweep of all POTUS and VEEP properties at the end of the administration.  Hire that person. >

Ahh yes
Hillary and Biden, inocent victims of human error.  Trump however, clearly the orange devil.
The partisan nature of all of this is so God damn fascinating >

Trump and his legal team attempted to obstruct the recovery of the documents and even lied about their existence. Thats why the fbi got involved in that diapute in the first place. That's a huge difference in terms of intent and context. All parties we are discussing can be wrong but one actually engaged in something potentially criminal >

You can prove they were wrong, you cannot prove they lied.
You have no proof that they knew they missed some documents >

Trump had a pile of some of the most classified documents in existence sitting in his office closet and desk, where he famously would show them off to anyone willing to give him attention. 
Biden mishandled a bunch of what I'm assuming are very low-level classified docs, and clearly didn't even know he still had them.
These are not the same thing. One is rooted in incompetence, the other is blatantly malicious.
By the way, why is Trump fighting so hard to get back classified documents he has zero rights to have access to in the first place?