🔗 Share this article

Former President Donald Trump has repeatedly shown his wish to see critics probed, applying influence on the DOJ to prosecute ex FBI Director James Comey and New York Attorney General Letitia James.

"We can't delay further, it's damaging our reputation and credibility," the president wrote last month in a Truth Social message.

"They impeached me, and indicted me (five times!)" he said, referencing the multiple legal proceedings he faced after departing the White House in 2021 and James's civil case.

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

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

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

The Specifics of the Case

Bolton has been criminally indicted on national allegations pertaining to the supposed mishandling of classified information. Since departing the White House in 2019, he has become a vocal presidential opponent, even to describe him "stunningly uninformed" and unfit for office in his book.

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 indicate a potentially more substantial legal argument than the DOJ presented against Comey.

"These actions that's being claimed is simultaneously more severe and seems to have occurred over a significant period of time," said Carissa Byrne Hessick, a professor at the University of North Carolina School of Law.

Throughout his time as Trump's security advisor, and after his 2019 White House exit, prosecutors claimed that Bolton placed the nation at risk by improperly keeping and transmitting sensitive documents to relatives using unprotected methods, including AOL. Some of the documents were labeled highly classified.

The charge alleges that at one point a unauthorized user gained access to Bolton's account where files were stored and transmitted an apparent warning to cause "the biggest controversy since Hillary [Clinton]'s emails were leaked".

Bolton pleaded not guilty during a court appearance on Friday to 18 separate counts of improperly handling classified information.

Retribution or a Substantial Legal Argument?

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

Trump previously suggested Bolton belonged in prison, and called him a "disreputable person". Bolton, for his part, authored a book about his experience in the Trump administration that was highly critical of the president.

"Undoubtedly that the schedule of this charge, when combined with others, has raised doubts about the strength of these allegations, and why these charges are being brought now," said Jamil Jaffer, creator and executive director of the National Security Institute.

Nevertheless, he continued, "should the Justice Department is able to prove the allegations stated and demonstrate the information is properly designated, his behavior may certainly have broken the law".

Prosecuting such a high-ranking official for improperly handling sensitive materials is "rare" but not without precedent, noted Carrie Cordero, a senior fellow at the Center for a New American Security.

"Situations that involve classified information pose difficulties to try, but they may and are filed against equally junior and high-level personnel, from time to time," she said.

Parallels to Examinations into Trump and President

Trump similarly 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 court official and negated by his return as president.

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

Bolton's case shares characteristics to Biden's classified documents matters, said Mr Lesko, who previously held a senior security role at the Justice Department.

Strict protocols regulate the handling of classified documents. To secure a guilty verdict, the prosecution must prove that Bolton was aware the material he was transmitting was restricted, and he had to intentionally transfer it to someone not entitled to receive it.

"Because of the sensitive nature of the material at issue in this case, we don't have a great deal of details about why the prosecution believes things like the personal notes and the additional information he communicated by email, and the reason there were classified," explained Mr Jaffer.

A Increasingly Conventional Legal Action

The process by which the DOJ initiated this case will be closely examined, following Trump openly expressed his desire to see his critics prosecuted and some of those charges materialized.

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

"This Bolton case and eventually the indictment seemed to have observed the regular process including the rules and standards within the DOJ," he said.

Unlike Comey's brief, concise charge, Bolton's was a increasingly "conventional" filing that "explicitly outlines the particulars concerning the facts and circumstances here," Mr Lesko said.

"It seems reasonably aligned with a series of cases... where government officials mishandled and shared sensitive information."