>

I’m wondering why such information is a printed document?  What’s the point of a secure viewing area when you can just walk out with printed documents? It’s so ironic that I expect Alanis to start singing.
Voted for Biden.
Go ahead and investigate. Use all the same measures that were taken during Trump’s investigation.
If it comes to light that he committed a, or multiple crimes, then I support any subsequent charges.
If it’s found that he didn’t commit any crimes, then I say to republicans; piss the fuck off. >

With consideration given to how many warnings/refusals/delays were made. Take something, have it asked to be returned, and so it immediately? Yeah it's probably fine
Take something, deny it, claim you returned it, and refuse anything further for months? Then have it found in your desks top drawer? Yeah nah, you're pulling a shifty >

Unknowingly having classified documents isn't a crime.  The procedure is specifically designed to NOT punish someone for admitting to a clerical error- the idea is that it's more valuable to get the documents back than to risk someone hiding that they were ever missing.  There is nothing here to investigate.  If anything, it's a prime example of the system working as intended.
This shit was thoroughly hammered out in the Hillary private email server case.  Comey explained it fairly clearly when they declined to pursue charges.  I'd consider an investigation for this to be an attempt at obstructionism.

Edit: 
18 US Code 1924 "Unauthorized retention of classified documents":

(a)Whoever, being an officer, employee, contractor, or consultant of the United States, and, by virtue of his office, employment, position, or contract, becomes possessed of documents or materials containing classified information of the United States, knowingly removes such documents or materials without authority and with the intent to retain such documents or materials at an unauthorized location shall be fined under this title or imprisoned for not more than five years, or both.

If you have a more appropriate citation, feel free to inform me.  I don't work with these documents, but clearly it's critically important that he have knowledge, intent, and authorization to retain the documents.  If he intended to retain them beyond authorization (end of Obama's term), then that still is only questionably an issue since he has maintained clearances the whole time.  So, yeah, chime in.  I want your adversarial take on this. >

They're hoping for a Clinton moment. Unleash the special counsel, and then maybe we find out Biden cheated on his wife. >

The current Special Counsel rules were drafted specifically to avoid another Ken Starr type investigation.  They used to be independent of the Justice Department.  Now they are still overseen by the AG and broadening an investigation requires the AG approval. >

Boring. :) >

I go back and forth on the ethics. I think having an independent prosecutor is a better look for the Executive. But it's hard to keep away fishing expeditions. It be cool if we quit electing presidents that do shady shit too... >

Why do we keep using "independent" as an implication there won't be bias? There's just no way around the problem. >

Independent in this context only means Independent of the Justice Department/Executive Branch.  Ken Starr was the perfect example of being Independent but driven by ideology. >

Which is exactly what I'm saying and I fail to understand how anything has definitively changed. >

wth is going on with the National Archives? They didn't even notice these classified docs. were missing until Biden's lawyers told them they found them.