🔗 Share this article

Former President Donald Trump has consistently shown his wish to see opponents probed, 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 social media message.

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

Each have since been charged, in cases that many experts have said appear to be politically motivated and challenging to succeed in legal proceedings.

But the latest charges against a presidential opponent, former security advisor John Bolton, stand apart, legal experts and former prosecutors say.

"In my opinion, comparing 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.

This Specifics of the Legal Situation

Bolton has been criminally indicted on federal charges related to the supposed mishandling of sensitive materials. Since departing the White House in 2019, he has emerged as a outspoken Trump critic, even to call him "remarkably ignorant" and unsuitable for the presidency in his memoir.

Specialists say that while there may be political motivations to go after Bolton, the methods used to obtain an indictment and the proof compiled against him indicate a possibly more substantial case than the Justice Department presented against James.

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

During his tenure as Trump's national security adviser, and following his 2019 White House exit, authorities alleged that Bolton put the nation at danger by improperly retaining and sending sensitive documents to family members using insecure means, including AOL. Several of the materials were labeled highly classified.

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

Bolton pleaded not guilty during a hearing on recently to 18 separate counts of mishandling sensitive materials.

Retribution or a Strong Legal Argument?

The schedule of his charge - coming on the tails of charges against Comey - has renewed concerns about political pressure on the justice system.

Trump previously implied Bolton belonged in prison, and called him a "sleazebag". Bolton, for his role, wrote a book about his experience in the Trump government that was highly critical of the president.

"Undoubtedly that the timing of this charge, when paired with additional cases, has prompted doubts about the validity of these charges, and why these counts are being brought now," stated Jamil Jaffer, founder and executive director of the National Security Institute.

Nevertheless, he continued, "should the Justice Department is capable to demonstrate the facts stated and show the information is correctly designated, his behavior may very well have violated the law".

Prosecuting such a senior figure for improperly handling sensitive materials is "uncommon" but not unprecedented, said Carrie Cordero, a expert at the Center for a New American Security.

"Situations that involve sensitive materials present difficulties to try, but they can and are brought against equally low-level and high-level personnel, from occasionally," she explained.

Similarities to Investigations into Former President and President

Trump similarly faced allegations of wrongfully storing sensitive materials at his Mar-a-Lago resort in Florida and hindering their return, but that matter was eventually thrown out by a federal judge and negated by his re-election as president.

A special counsel additionally determined that ex-President Joe Biden wrongfully maintained sensitive materials from his time as vice president, but failed to prosecute him.

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

Strict protocols regulate the management of classified documents. To win a guilty verdict, 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 don't have a lot of particulars about why the prosecution believes things like the diary entries and the additional material he communicated by email, and the reason there were restricted," said Mr Jaffer.

A More Conventional Prosecution

The process by which the DOJ brought this legal action will be under scrutiny, following Trump publicly posted his wish to see his political opponents prosecuted and some of those indictments came to fruition.

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

"The Bolton case and eventually the indictment seemed to have followed the standard process including the regulations and norms within the Department of Justice," he said.

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

"It appears reasonably aligned with a long line of precedents... where government officials mishandled and shared classified material."