🔗 Share this article

Ex-President Donald Trump has repeatedly expressed his desire to see opponents probed, exerting influence on the Justice Department to prosecute former FBI Director James Comey and New York Attorney General Letitia James.

"We can't delay further, it's killing our standing and credibility," the leader wrote last month in a Truth Social post.

"I was impeached twice, and indicted me (5 times!)" he declared, referencing the multiple legal proceedings he encountered after departing the White House in 2021 and James's lawsuit.

Each have since been indicted, in cases that numerous experts have said appear to be driven by politics and challenging to win in legal proceedings.

But the latest charges against a Trump critic, former security advisor John Bolton, differ significantly, legal specialists and ex-prosecutors assert.

"In my opinion, comparing Bolton's charges to Comey's is like equating two different things," stated Mark Lesko, a ex federal prosecutor for the Eastern District of New York.

This Specifics of Bolton's Case

Bolton has been criminally indicted on federal charges pertaining to the supposed improper handling of sensitive materials. After leaving the White House in 2019, he has emerged as a vocal presidential opponent, going so far as to call him "remarkably ignorant" and unsuitable for the presidency in his book.

Experts contend that while there may be political motivations to target Bolton, the procedures used to secure an indictment and the proof gathered against him suggest a possibly more substantial case than the Justice Department presented against James.

"These actions that's being claimed is both more severe and seems to have taken place over a considerable period of time," said Carissa Byrne Hessick, a professor at the University of North Carolina School of Law.

During his time as Trump's national security adviser, and after his 2019 White House exit, authorities claimed that Bolton placed the nation at danger by improperly retaining and sending classified information to relatives using unprotected methods, including AOL. Several of the documents were marked highly classified.

The indictment states that at one point a hacker gained access to Bolton's system where files were kept and transmitted an seeming warning to cause "the largest scandal since Hillary [Clinton]'s emails were released".

Bolton entered a not guilty plea during a court appearance on recently to 18 separate counts of mishandling sensitive materials.

Retribution or a Strong Legal Argument?

The schedule of his charge - coming on the heels of allegations against James - has renewed questions about political pressure on the justice system.

Trump once suggested Bolton should be in jail, and called him a "disreputable person". Bolton, for his part, wrote a book about his time in the Trump administration that was highly critical of the leader.

"Undoubtedly that the timing of this charge, when combined with others, has raised questions about the validity of these allegations, and why these charges are being brought now," stated Jamil Jaffer, founder and director of the National Security Institute.

Nevertheless, he added, "if the Justice Department is able to prove the facts alleged and show the material is properly classified, his conduct may certainly have broken the statute".

Charging such a senior figure for mishandling classified documents is "uncommon" but not unprecedented, said Carrie Cordero, a expert at the Center for a New American Security.

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

Similarities to Investigations into Trump and Biden

Trump likewise faced charges of improperly storing sensitive materials at his Mar-a-Lago property in Florida and obstructing their return, but that case was ultimately dismissed by a court official and voided by his return as leader.

A independent investigator also determined that former President Joe Biden wrongfully maintained classified documents from his time as second-in-command, but did not prosecute him.

Bolton's case bears similarities to Trump's sensitive materials issues, said Mr Lesko, who previously held a top national security role at the DOJ.

Strict protocols govern the handling of classified documents. To win a guilty verdict, the prosecution must demonstrate that Bolton knew the material he was sending was restricted, and he had to intentionally transfer it to someone not entitled to obtain it.

"Because of the classified nature of the material at issue in this matter, we lack a great deal of particulars about why the government believes things like the diary entries and the additional information he shared by email, and the reason there were classified," said Mr Jaffer.

A More Traditional Legal Action

The process by which the Justice Department initiated this case will be closely examined, following Trump publicly expressed his desire to see his political opponents charged and several of those indictments materialized.

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

"The Bolton prosecution and eventually the charge seemed to have observed the standard process including the rules and standards within the Department of Justice," he said.

In contrast to Comey's brief, concise charge, Bolton's was a more "conventional" filing that "explicitly outlines the details concerning the facts and situation in this instance," Mr Lesko said.

"It seems reasonably aligned with a series of cases... where public servants mishandled and transmitted sensitive information."