🔗 Share this article

Ex-President Donald Trump has consistently expressed his desire to see critics investigated, exerting influence on the DOJ to charge former FBI Director James Comey and New York Attorney General Letitia James.

"We cannot postpone any longer, it's killing our standing and credibility," the leader stated last month in a Truth Social post.

"They impeached me, and indicted me (5 times!)" he declared, referencing the multiple legal proceedings he faced after leaving the White House in 2021 and James's lawsuit.

Both have subsequently been indicted, in cases that numerous experts have stated seem to be driven by politics and difficult to succeed in court.

But the most recent charges against a Trump critic, former national security adviser John Bolton, differ significantly, legal specialists and ex-prosecutors assert.

"In my opinion, contrasting Bolton's case to James' is like equating apples to oranges," said Mark Lesko, a former federal prosecutor for the Eastern District of New York.

The Details of Bolton's Case

Bolton has been formally charged on national allegations pertaining to the supposed improper handling of sensitive materials. Since leaving the White House in 2019, he has emerged as a outspoken presidential opponent, even to call him "remarkably ignorant" and unsuitable for office in his memoir.

Experts contend that while there may be political reasons to go after Bolton, the methods used to obtain an indictment and the proof compiled against him suggest a potentially stronger legal argument than the Justice Department presented against Comey.

"This misconduct that's being alleged is simultaneously more serious and appears to have taken place over a significant period of time," commented Carissa Byrne Hessick, a professor at the University of North Carolina School of Law.

During his tenure as Trump's national security adviser, and following his 2019 White House departure, prosecutors alleged that Bolton put the nation at risk by wrongfully retaining and sending classified information to relatives using unprotected methods, including AOL. Several of the materials were marked top secret.

The charge states that at one point a hacker gained access to Bolton's system where files were stored and transmitted an seeming threat to cause "the biggest scandal since Hillary [Clinton]'s emails were leaked".

Bolton entered a not guilty plea during a court appearance on recently to eighteen distinct counts of mishandling classified information.

Political Motivation or a Substantial Legal Argument?

The timing of his indictment - arriving on the tails of allegations against James - has renewed questions about external influence on the legal system.

Trump once suggested Bolton belonged in jail, and called him a "disreputable person". Bolton, for his part, authored a publication about his experience in the Trump government that was sharply negative of the leader.

"Undoubtedly that the timing of this indictment, when combined with additional cases, has raised doubts about the validity of these charges, and the reason these counts are being filed now," stated Jamil Jaffer, creator and director of the National Security Institute.

Nevertheless, he added, "should the DOJ is capable to prove the facts stated and demonstrate the information is correctly classified, his conduct may certainly have violated the statute".

Charging such a high-ranking figure for mishandling sensitive materials is "uncommon" but not without precedent, noted Carrie Cordero, a senior fellow at the Center for a New American Security.

"Cases that concern classified information pose difficulties to try, but they may and are filed against both low-level and senior personnel, from occasionally," she explained.

Parallels to Examinations into Former President and President

Trump likewise encountered allegations of improperly storing classified documents at his Mar-a-Lago resort in Florida and hindering their recovery, but that case was ultimately thrown out by a federal judge and voided by his return as president.

A independent investigator additionally found that ex-President Joe Biden improperly maintained classified documents from his time as vice president, but did not criminally charge him.

Bolton's situation shares characteristics to Trump's sensitive materials matters, said Mr Lesko, who previously held a top national security position at the Justice Department.

Strict procedures regulate the management of sensitive materials. To secure a conviction, the prosecution must demonstrate that Bolton knew the information he was sending was classified, and he had to intentionally transfer it to someone not entitled to receive it.

"Because of the sensitive nature of the information at issue in this matter, we don't have a great deal of details about the reasons the prosecution contends things like the personal notes and the other information he shared by email, and why there were restricted," explained Mr Jaffer.

A More Traditional Legal Action

The process by which the DOJ initiated this legal action will be closely examined, following Trump publicly expressed his desire to see his political opponents prosecuted and several of those indictments came to fruition.

But Mr Lesko said in Bolton's situation, prosecutors seem to have adhered to standard procedure.

"This Bolton case and eventually the indictment seemed to have followed the standard procedure including the rules and norms within the DOJ," he said.

Unlike Comey's short, concise charge, Bolton's was a more "conventional" filing that "explicitly outlines the details concerning the circumstances and circumstances in this instance," Mr Lesko said.

"It appears reasonably consistent with a long line of precedents... where government officials improperly handled and transmitted sensitive information."