🔗 Share this article

Former President Donald Trump has repeatedly shown his desire to see opponents investigated, applying pressure on the DOJ to prosecute ex FBI Director James Comey and New York Attorney General Letitia James.

"We cannot postpone further, it's damaging our standing and credibility," the president wrote last month in a Truth Social message.

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

Both have since been indicted, in situations that numerous specialists have said appear to be politically motivated and difficult to win in court.

But the most recent allegations against a presidential opponent, ex security advisor John Bolton, differ significantly, legal experts and former prosecutors say.

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

The Details of the Case

Bolton has been criminally indicted on federal charges related 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 "stunningly uninformed" and unfit for office in his memoir.

Experts say that while there may be political reasons to go after Bolton, the procedures used to obtain an charge and the proof gathered against him suggest a potentially stronger legal argument than the Justice Department presented against James.

"This misconduct that's being alleged is simultaneously more serious and seems to have taken place over a considerable duration," commented Carissa Byrne Hessick, a academic at the University of North Carolina School of Law.

During his tenure as Trump's security advisor, and after his 2019 White House departure, authorities alleged that Bolton put the nation at danger by wrongfully retaining and transmitting sensitive documents to relatives using unprotected methods, including AOL. Some of the materials were marked highly classified.

The indictment alleges that at a certain time a unauthorized user gained access to Bolton's system where documents were stored and transmitted an apparent threat to cause "the biggest scandal since Hillary [Clinton]'s emails were released".

Bolton entered a not guilty plea during a hearing on Friday to 18 distinct charges of improperly handling sensitive materials.

Political Motivation or a Substantial Legal Argument?

The schedule of his charge - coming on the heels of charges against Comey - has renewed concerns about external influence on the justice system.

Trump previously implied Bolton should be in jail, and called him a "sleazebag". Bolton, for his part, wrote a publication about his experience in the Trump government that was sharply negative of the president.

"Undoubtedly that the schedule of this charge, when paired with others, has prompted doubts about the validity of these allegations, and why these counts are being brought at this time," stated Jamil Jaffer, creator and executive director of the National Security Institute.

However, he added, "should the DOJ is capable to prove the allegations stated and demonstrate the material is properly designated, his conduct may certainly have violated the statute".

Charging such a senior official for mishandling classified documents is "rare" but not without precedent, noted 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 filed against both low-level and high-level personnel, from occasionally," she said.

Parallels to Examinations into Former President and President

Trump similarly encountered allegations of wrongfully keeping sensitive materials at his Mar-a-Lago resort in Florida and hindering their recovery, but that matter was ultimately thrown out by a court official and negated by his re-election as leader.

A independent investigator additionally found that former President Joe Biden improperly stored sensitive materials from his time as second-in-command, but failed to prosecute him.

Bolton's situation bears similarities to Trump's sensitive materials issues, said Mr Lesko, who also held a top security position at the DOJ.

Rigorous procedures regulate the handling of sensitive materials. To win a conviction, the prosecution must demonstrate that Bolton knew the information he was transmitting was restricted, and he had to knowingly transmit it to someone without authorization to receive it.

"Because of the classified nature of the information at question in this case, we lack a lot of particulars about the reasons the prosecution contends things like the personal notes and the other information he shared by electronic message, 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, after Trump publicly expressed his wish to see his political opponents prosecuted and some of those charges came to fruition.

But Mr Lesko indicated in Bolton's situation, authorities seem to have followed protocol.

"This Bolton prosecution and ultimately the charge seemed to have followed the regular process including the regulations and norms within the Department of Justice," he stated.

In contrast to Comey's brief, two-page indictment, Bolton's was a increasingly "conventional" document that "explicitly sets forth the details concerning the facts and circumstances here," Mr Lesko said.

"It seems reasonably consistent with a series of precedents... where public servants improperly handled and transmitted classified material."