🔗 Share this article

Former President Donald Trump has consistently expressed his wish to see critics probed, applying pressure on the DOJ to charge ex FBI Director James Comey and New York Attorney General Letitia James.

"We cannot postpone any longer, it's damaging our standing and trustworthiness," the president stated last month in a Truth Social post.

"They impeached twice, and indicted me (five times!)" he said, mentioning the multiple legal proceedings he encountered after departing the White House in 2021 and James's lawsuit.

Both have since been charged, in cases that many experts have said seem to be politically motivated and challenging to win in legal proceedings.

But the latest allegations against a Trump critic, former security advisor John Bolton, differ significantly, legal experts and ex-prosecutors say.

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

The Specifics of the Case

Bolton has been criminally indicted on national allegations pertaining to the supposed improper handling of classified information. Since leaving the White House in 2019, he has become a outspoken Trump critic, going so far as to describe him "remarkably ignorant" and unfit for office in his memoir.

Specialists say that while there may be political reasons to go after Bolton, the methods used to obtain an charge and the proof compiled against him suggest a possibly more substantial case than the DOJ brought against Comey.

"These actions that's being claimed is simultaneously more serious and seems to have taken place over a significant duration," said Carissa Byrne Hessick, a academic at the University of North Carolina School of Law.

During his time as Trump's security advisor, and after his 2019 White House departure, prosecutors claimed that Bolton placed the country at danger by wrongfully keeping and sending classified information to relatives using unprotected methods, including AOL. Several of the documents were labeled top secret.

The indictment states that at one point a hacker accessed to Bolton's system where files were stored and transmitted an apparent threat to cause "the largest controversy since Hillary [Clinton]'s emails were leaked".

Bolton pleaded not guilty during a court appearance on recently to 18 separate counts of improperly handling sensitive materials.

Political Motivation or a Substantial Case?

The timing of his charge - coming on the heels of charges against James - has revived questions about political pressure on the justice system.

Trump once suggested Bolton belonged in jail, and described him a "disreputable person". Bolton, for his role, authored a book about his time in the Trump government that was sharply negative of the leader.

"There's no question that the schedule of this indictment, when paired with others, has prompted questions about the strength of these charges, and why these counts are being filed now," stated Jamil Jaffer, creator and director of the National Security Institute.

Nevertheless, he continued, "if the DOJ is capable to prove the allegations stated and demonstrate the material is properly designated, his behavior may certainly have broken the law".

Charging such a high-ranking official for improperly handling classified documents is "rare" but not without precedent, said Carrie Cordero, a expert at the Center for a New American Security.

"Situations that concern classified information pose difficulties to prosecute, but they can and are brought against both low-level and senior personnel, from time to time," she explained.

Parallels to Investigations into Trump and Biden

Trump similarly faced charges of wrongfully keeping sensitive materials at his Mar-a-Lago property in Florida and hindering their recovery, but that matter was ultimately dismissed by a federal judge and voided by his re-election as president.

A special counsel also found that former President Joe Biden improperly maintained classified documents from his period as second-in-command, but failed to prosecute him.

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

Strict protocols regulate the handling of classified documents. To secure a guilty verdict, the government must prove that Bolton knew the information he was transmitting was classified, and he had to knowingly transfer it to someone not entitled to obtain it.

"Due to the classified nature of the information at issue in this case, we don't have a great deal of details about why the government contends elements like the personal notes and the other material he shared by email, and why there were restricted," said Mr Jaffer.

A More Conventional Prosecution

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

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

"The Bolton prosecution and eventually the charge appeared to have observed the standard procedure including the regulations and standards within the Department of Justice," he stated.

In contrast to Comey's short, two-page indictment, Bolton's was a increasingly "traditional" document that "clearly outlines the details concerning the facts and circumstances here," Mr Lesko commented.

"It seems fairly aligned with a series of precedents... where government officials improperly handled and transmitted sensitive information."