How did Joe Biden get classified documents out of a SCIF?

Classified materials are routinely taken into and out of a SCIF... it's virtually SOP.
Just depends on the project's requirements are...
Not sure what the big deal is here?

Are you telling us that you have routinely taken classified documents out of the SCIF? Because I have heard the testimony of several, perhaps as many as 5 saying they didn't ever, not once take classified material out of a SCIF.

Then I did hear the testimony of one guy whose job it was to move documents from one location to another and he said he was regularly monitored while doing this, he said it was a very big deal, and he made it very clear that if he were to misplace the documents for even an hour he would have been fired and possibly incarcerated.

Yes, routinely.

Don't get me wrong... it is "a big deal" but it is done routinely, and it's done of necessity. Again, each project/program has its specific handling guidelines, and they can vary greatly. A lot depends on the facility the SCIF is located in and the SCIF itself.
Routine transport of classified material is needed for mundane things such as manufacturing, editing, marking, reproduction, etc. And would include transport off-site.

Yes, routinely.

Don't get me wrong... it is "a big deal" but it is done routinely, and it's done of necessity. Again, each project/program has its specific handling guidelines, and they can vary greatly. A lot depends on the facility the SCIF is located in and the SCIF itself.
Routine transport of classified material is needed for mundane things such as manufacturing, editing, marking, reproduction, etc. And would include transport off-site.

Is this done by Senators and VP's? Don't they keep a record of who has what? Why would Biden be able to keep documents for years, maybe even for more than a decade?

I understand that documents would be moved from one SCIF to another since they don't want them transmitted electronically, but I thought the transport was done by special couriers and it was closely monitored.

Is it routine that some Senator or VP would take them home and leave them in the garage for 4 years?

Is it routine that you would let your crack head son read them and then send his own summary by email to foreigners to justify a 80k a month salary? Is this truly "done all the time"?

That's a tough one...

I would say, from my experience, working in corporate security (Def. Contractors), that the mishandling of classified materials is just about as routine as the other stuff.

The government/governing agencies are often referred to as User-Agencies and they set the rules/regulations for the handling of materials and pretty much every aspect in regard to how the project/program is handled and carried out. The contracting agency is required to then follow those guidelines... However, if a member of the user-agency departs from the guidelines for whatever reason, it puts the contracting agency in a poor position... if you make "problems", you could potentially lose your contract. Make sense?
So, IOW... the user-agencies frequently break their own rules as it suits their immediate needs. I've personally witnessed this myself on countless occasions. Senators, VPs, Congressmen, senior staff, foreign representatives, and "key-players" in a program frequently are deferred to just because that's the nature of "power".

As for the transmission (electronic or otherwise), transportation/delivery, "couriers"... I think that the general public would be horrified at how lax protocol can be. Just as a "for-instance", when Clinton first became Pres., they instituted most, if not all, security clearance paperwork to be done online, and over the standard internet... not a secure server mind you. And that paperwork includes the very personal and private (sometimes classified) information of the persons submitting for a needed clearance.

I taught forensics. Protocols are put into place to protect against fraud and corruption. Therefore when someone violates those protocols to me it is a very big red flag that has to be investigated.

I worked on Wall Street around a bunch of crooks and I can testify they broke the rules and it was always to commit fraud and rob people. The Mortgage meltdown in 2008 is an excellent example. You have a fiduciary responsibility to have the best interest of your client, to explain to them what they are signing and to make sure it makes sense for them. They didn't do any of that, they knew in five years the banks would repossess the house, they knew the people who they were putting into the houses had no idea that was about to happen. The bank collected about $24,000 a year in the mortgage payments for five years, 120k, and then pulled the rug out and repo'd the house. It was a massive fraud, something you would expect the Mafia to do.

The idea that someone who claims to be a Christian and that works in this industry would minimize the significance of this is stunning to me. We aren't talking hypotheticals. We are talking about Biden bringing boxes of documents back to his house where his son is paying him $49,000 a month rent and sending emails packed full of classified information to countries that we are now being pulled into WWIII over. We know that Biden went to Ukraine and threatened them to stop investigating his son and we know that he thought $4 billion was too much to spend on our Southern border but at the snap of the fingers sends $120 billion to Ukraine.

I am stunned by your attitude and cannot believe corporate America would hire anyone to handle their security with this carefree attitude.

I'm not sure why you're "stunned" by my attitude? I wasn't aware that I was communicating my attitude? lol I was just trying to give the readers information based on my experience.

Just as an FYI, the regulation of matters governing classified materials and security clearance issues is done by Executive Order, not law. And as such, the executive branch administers legislation/"punishment" at their discretion. Congress can of course strike down Exec. Orders but rarely do so.

The point is, as in your own experience, much of the corruption in the US, regardless of the area of influence, is so "standardized" that in my opinion, the real absurdity is the reaction of the media, and then the general public, to any one given situation. Both the media (especially) and the public are already aware that IT exists but turn a blind eye to it. I'm not a psychologist, but my guess is that people don't want to deal with the depravity of it all. They're all complicit for the most part.
As I understand it, from agents that were issuing clearances to Clinton's incoming Cabinet/staff, people that I knew... none of them met the standards to receive a clearance. Mostly issues relating to illicit drug use and/or lifestyle. So, Clinton amended the E.O. Basically stating that the standards/morals were outdated and behind the times. And the general public agreed... many people lauded the Clinton as "progressive" in social reform. His sex-scandals were laughed about, and many said that it was totally acceptable by today's standard... a President should be able to have affairs, it was a personal choice and did not have anything to do with his ability to govern.

As for my "attitude"... well, I was essentially black balled from security and threatened for whistle blowing. So, I kinda' doubt you have a clue what my attitude is.