🔗 Share this article

Ex-President Donald Trump has repeatedly expressed his desire 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 any longer, it's killing our reputation and credibility," the leader wrote recently in a Truth Social post.

"I was impeached me, and charged me (five times!)" he said, referencing the four criminal cases he encountered after departing the White House in 2021 and James's civil case.

Both have subsequently been indicted, in cases that numerous experts have stated appear to be driven by politics and challenging to succeed in legal proceedings.

But the most recent allegations against a Trump critic, former security advisor John Bolton, stand apart, legal experts and ex-prosecutors say.

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

This Details of the Case

Bolton has been criminally indicted on national allegations related to the supposed improper handling of sensitive materials. After leaving the White House in 2019, he has emerged as a vocal presidential opponent, going so far as to describe him "stunningly uninformed" and unfit for office in his memoir.

Specialists say that while there may be political reasons to target Bolton, the procedures used to obtain an charge and the evidence compiled against him indicate a possibly stronger case than the DOJ presented against James.

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

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

The charge states that at a certain time a unauthorized user gained access to Bolton's account where documents were stored and transmitted an apparent threat to cause "the biggest scandal since Hillary [Clinton]'s emails were leaked".

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

Retribution or a Strong Case?

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

Trump previously suggested Bolton should be in prison, and called him a "sleazebag". Bolton, for his role, wrote a publication about his experience in the Trump government that was highly critical of the leader.

"There's no question that the schedule of this indictment, when combined with additional cases, has prompted questions about the validity of these allegations, and the reason these counts are being brought now," said Jamil Jaffer, creator and director of the National Security Institute.

However, he added, "should the DOJ is able to demonstrate the facts stated and demonstrate the material is correctly designated, his behavior may very well have broken the statute".

Prosecuting 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.

"Cases that concern sensitive materials present challenges to try, but they can and are brought against equally junior and senior personnel, from time to time," she explained.

Similarities to Investigations into Former President and President

Trump similarly encountered charges of wrongfully storing sensitive materials at his Mar-a-Lago property in Florida and obstructing their return, but that matter was ultimately thrown out by a federal judge and negated by his return as president.

A independent investigator additionally determined that former President Joe Biden improperly maintained classified documents from his period as second-in-command, but did not criminally charge him.

Bolton's situation shares characteristics to Trump's sensitive materials matters, said Mr Lesko, who previously held a senior national security role at the DOJ.

Rigorous protocols regulate the management of sensitive materials. To win a conviction, the prosecution must prove that Bolton was aware the information he was sending was classified, and he had to intentionally transmit it to someone not entitled to obtain it.

"Because of the classified character of the information at question in this matter, we lack a great deal of details about the reasons the prosecution believes elements like the personal notes and the additional information he shared by electronic message, and why there were classified," explained Mr Jaffer.

A Increasingly Conventional Prosecution

The process by which the DOJ brought this case will be under scrutiny, following Trump openly expressed his desire to see his political opponents prosecuted and some of those indictments materialized.

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

"This Bolton prosecution and eventually the charge seemed to have followed the standard process including the rules and standards within the Department of Justice," he said.

Unlike Comey's brief, two-page indictment, Bolton's was a increasingly "conventional" document that "explicitly outlines the details involving the circumstances and circumstances in this instance," Mr Lesko said.

"It seems fairly consistent with a series of precedents... where government officials mishandled and transmitted sensitive information."