🔗 Share this article

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

"We can't delay further, it's killing our reputation and trustworthiness," the president wrote recently in a Truth Social message.

"I was impeached twice, and charged me (5 times!)" he said, referencing the four criminal cases he encountered after leaving the White House in 2021 and James's lawsuit.

Both have since been charged, in situations that numerous experts have stated appear to be politically motivated and difficult to win in legal proceedings.

But the latest charges against a presidential opponent, ex national security adviser John Bolton, stand apart, legal specialists and former prosecutors assert.

"I would say, comparing Bolton's case to James' is like comparing apples to oranges," stated Mark Lesko, a former acting US attorney for the Eastern District of New York.

This Specifics of Bolton's Case

Bolton has been formally charged on national allegations pertaining to the supposed improper handling of classified information. Since leaving the White House in 2019, he has emerged as a vocal presidential opponent, even to call him "remarkably ignorant" and unfit for office in his book.

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

"These actions that's being alleged is both more severe and seems to have taken place 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 alleged that Bolton put the country at danger by wrongfully retaining and transmitting classified information to family members using unprotected methods, including AOL. Several of the materials were marked highly classified.

The indictment states 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 largest controversy since Hillary [Clinton]'s emails were leaked".

Bolton entered a not guilty plea during a hearing on Friday to eighteen separate charges of mishandling classified information.

Retribution or a Substantial Legal Argument?

The timing of his indictment - arriving on the tails of allegations against James - has renewed concerns about political pressure on the justice system.

Trump previously implied Bolton should be in jail, and called him a "disreputable person". Bolton, for his part, wrote a publication about his time 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 strength of these allegations, and why these charges are being filed at this time," stated Jamil Jaffer, founder and director of the National Security Institute.

However, he added, "if the Justice Department is capable to demonstrate the allegations stated and show the material is correctly designated, his behavior may certainly have broken the statute".

Charging such a senior official for mishandling sensitive materials is "rare" but not without precedent, noted Carrie Cordero, a senior fellow at the Center for a New American Security.

"Situations that concern sensitive materials present difficulties to prosecute, but they may and are brought against equally junior and senior personnel, from occasionally," she said.

Similarities to Examinations into Trump and President

Trump likewise encountered charges of wrongfully keeping sensitive materials at his Mar-a-Lago resort in Florida and obstructing their recovery, but that matter was eventually thrown out by a court official and voided by his return as president.

A independent investigator also determined that ex-President Joe Biden improperly stored classified documents from his time as vice president, but did not prosecute him.

Bolton's case bears similarities to Biden's sensitive materials matters, noted Mr Lesko, who also held a top security role at the Justice Department.

Rigorous protocols govern the management of sensitive materials. To secure a conviction, the prosecution must demonstrate that Bolton was aware the material he was transmitting was restricted, and he had to knowingly transfer it to someone without authorization to obtain it.

"Because of the classified character of the material at question in this matter, we don't have a great deal of particulars about the reasons the prosecution believes things like the diary entries and the additional material he communicated by email, and the reason there were classified," said Mr Jaffer.

A Increasingly Conventional Legal Action

The procedure by which the Justice Department initiated this case will be closely examined, after Trump publicly expressed his desire to see his critics charged and several of those indictments came to fruition.

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

"The Bolton case and ultimately the indictment seemed to have observed the regular procedure including the rules and standards within the Department of Justice," he said.

Unlike Comey's short, concise indictment, Bolton's was a increasingly "traditional" document that "explicitly sets forth the particulars concerning the facts and situation in this instance," Mr Lesko said.

"It appears fairly consistent with a long line of precedents... where public servants mishandled and transmitted classified material."