🔗 Share this article

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

"We can't delay any longer, it's killing our reputation and credibility," the leader stated last month in a Truth Social post.

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

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

But the latest charges against a Trump critic, ex national security adviser John Bolton, differ significantly, legal experts and former prosecutors assert.

"I would say, comparing Bolton's case to Comey's is like comparing two different things," stated Mark Lesko, a ex federal prosecutor for the Eastern District of New York.

The Specifics of Bolton's Legal Situation

Bolton has been formally charged on national allegations related to the alleged mishandling of classified information. Since leaving the White House in 2019, he has become a vocal Trump critic, going so far as to describe him "remarkably ignorant" and unfit for office in his memoir.

Experts contend that while there may be political reasons to go after Bolton, the procedures used to secure an indictment and the proof gathered against him indicate a possibly more substantial case than the Justice Department brought against Comey.

"This misconduct that's being claimed is simultaneously more severe and appears to have occurred over a considerable duration," said Carissa Byrne Hessick, a academic at the University of North Carolina School of Law.

During his time as Trump's national security adviser, and following his 2019 White House departure, prosecutors claimed that Bolton placed the country at danger by wrongfully keeping and transmitting sensitive documents to family members using insecure means, including AOL. Several of the documents were labeled top secret.

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

Bolton pleaded not guilty during a hearing on recently to 18 distinct counts of mishandling classified information.

Political Motivation or a Substantial Legal Argument?

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

Trump previously implied Bolton belonged in jail, and described him a "disreputable person". Bolton, for his part, authored a publication about his experience in the Trump administration that was highly critical of the leader.

"There's no question that the schedule of this charge, when combined with others, has raised questions about the strength of these charges, and the reason these charges are being brought now," stated Jamil Jaffer, creator and executive director of the National Security Institute.

However, he added, "if the Justice Department is able to demonstrate the allegations stated and demonstrate the information is correctly classified, his conduct may certainly have broken the statute".

Charging such a senior official for mishandling classified documents is "uncommon" but not without precedent, noted Carrie Cordero, a expert at the Center for a New American Security.

"Situations that involve classified information pose challenges to prosecute, but they can and are filed against both low-level and senior personnel, from occasionally," she explained.

Parallels to Examinations into Trump and President

Trump likewise encountered allegations of improperly keeping sensitive materials 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 special counsel also found that former President Joe Biden wrongfully maintained sensitive materials from his time as second-in-command, but failed to prosecute him.

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

Strict procedures govern the handling of sensitive materials. To win a guilty verdict, the government must prove that Bolton was aware the information he was transmitting was restricted, and he had to knowingly transmit it to someone without authorization to obtain it.

"Due to the sensitive character of the material at issue in this case, we don't have a great deal of details about why the government believes elements like the personal notes and the additional information he shared by electronic message, and why there were restricted," said Mr Jaffer.

A Increasingly Traditional Legal Action

The process by which the DOJ brought this case will be closely examined, following Trump publicly posted his desire to see his political opponents charged and some of those charges came to fruition.

But Mr Lesko said in Bolton's case, authorities appear to have followed protocol.

"The Bolton case and ultimately the charge seemed to have followed the standard process including the regulations and standards within the DOJ," he said.

In contrast to Comey's brief, concise indictment, Bolton's was a more "conventional" document that "clearly sets forth the particulars involving the facts and circumstances here," Mr Lesko said.

"It seems reasonably consistent with a series of cases... where government officials improperly handled and shared sensitive information."