🔗 Share this article

Ex-President Donald Trump has consistently shown his wish to see critics probed, applying pressure on the Justice Department to prosecute former FBI Director James Comey and New York Attorney General Letitia James.

"We cannot postpone further, it's killing our reputation and credibility," the president wrote last month in a Truth Social post.

"They impeached me, and indicted me (5 times!)" he said, mentioning the multiple legal proceedings he encountered after leaving the White House in 2021 and James's lawsuit.

Both have since been charged, in cases that many specialists have said seem to be politically motivated and difficult to win in court.

But the latest allegations against a presidential opponent, ex security advisor John Bolton, differ significantly, legal specialists and ex-prosecutors assert.

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

The Specifics of Bolton's Legal Situation

Bolton has been formally charged on national allegations pertaining to the alleged improper handling of sensitive materials. After departing the White House in 2019, he has become a vocal presidential opponent, even to call him "stunningly uninformed" and unsuitable for office in his memoir.

Specialists say that while there may be political motivations to target Bolton, the methods used to obtain an charge and the evidence compiled against him indicate a possibly more substantial case than the Justice Department presented against Comey.

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

Throughout his time as Trump's national security adviser, and following his 2019 White House departure, authorities alleged that Bolton placed the country at risk by improperly retaining and transmitting classified information to relatives using unprotected methods, including AOL. Several of the documents were marked top secret.

The indictment states that at a certain time a hacker gained access to Bolton's account where files were stored and sent an apparent warning to cause "the largest scandal since Hillary [Clinton]'s emails were leaked".

Bolton entered a not guilty plea during a court appearance on recently to eighteen separate charges of mishandling classified information.

Retribution or a Substantial Legal Argument?

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

Trump previously implied Bolton belonged in jail, and called him a "disreputable person". Bolton, for his role, wrote a book about his experience in the Trump administration that was sharply negative of the president.

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

However, he continued, "if the DOJ is capable to prove the allegations alleged and demonstrate the information is correctly classified, his conduct may very well have broken the law".

Prosecuting such a high-ranking official for improperly handling sensitive materials is "rare" but not unprecedented, said Carrie Cordero, a expert at the Center for a New American Security.

"Situations that involve sensitive materials present difficulties to prosecute, but they can and are filed against both junior and senior officials, from occasionally," she explained.

Parallels to Examinations into Trump and President

Trump likewise encountered charges of wrongfully keeping classified documents at his Mar-a-Lago property in Florida and hindering their recovery, but that case was eventually dismissed by a federal judge and voided by his return as leader.

A independent investigator also determined that ex-President Joe Biden improperly maintained sensitive materials from his period as vice president, but failed to prosecute him.

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

Rigorous protocols govern the handling of sensitive materials. To win a conviction, the government must prove that Bolton knew the material he was transmitting was classified, and he had to knowingly transfer it to someone not entitled to receive it.

"Due to the sensitive character of the material at issue in this case, we lack a lot of details about the reasons the prosecution contends things like the diary entries and the additional material he shared by email, and the reason there were restricted," explained Mr Jaffer.

A Increasingly Conventional Prosecution

The process by which the DOJ brought this legal action will be under scrutiny, following Trump openly expressed his wish to see his critics charged and some of those charges materialized.

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

"The Bolton case and eventually the charge appeared to have observed the standard procedure including the regulations and standards within the DOJ," he said.

In contrast to Comey's short, concise charge, Bolton's was a more "traditional" document that "explicitly sets forth the details concerning the facts and circumstances in this instance," Mr Lesko said.

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