🔗 Share this article

Ex-President Donald Trump has consistently expressed his wish to see critics investigated, applying influence on the DOJ to prosecute former FBI Director James Comey and New York Attorney General Letitia James.

"We can't delay any longer, it's killing our standing and credibility," the leader wrote last month in a Truth Social message.

"They impeached me, and charged me (five times!)" he said, referencing the four criminal cases he faced after departing the White House in 2021 and James's lawsuit.

Each have subsequently been charged, in situations that numerous experts have said seem to be politically motivated and challenging to win in court.

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

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

This Details of the Legal Situation

Bolton has been criminally indicted on federal charges related to the supposed improper handling of sensitive materials. Since leaving the White House in 2019, he has emerged as a outspoken presidential opponent, even to call him "stunningly uninformed" and unfit for office in his memoir.

Experts contend that while there may be political motivations to go after Bolton, the procedures used to secure an charge and the proof gathered against him suggest a possibly more substantial case than the DOJ brought against Comey.

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

During his tenure as Trump's security advisor, and following his 2019 White House departure, authorities claimed that Bolton put the country at danger by wrongfully retaining and transmitting sensitive documents to relatives using insecure means, including AOL. Some of the documents were marked top secret.

The indictment alleges that at one point a hacker accessed to Bolton's account where files were kept and transmitted an seeming 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 distinct counts of improperly handling sensitive materials.

Political Motivation or a Substantial Case?

The timing of his indictment - coming on the heels of charges against James - has renewed questions about political pressure on the legal system.

Trump previously implied Bolton belonged in prison, and described him a "sleazebag". Bolton, for his part, wrote a book about his time in the Trump government that was highly critical of the leader.

"Undoubtedly that the timing of this charge, when paired with additional cases, has raised questions about the strength of these allegations, and why these counts are being filed at this time," said Jamil Jaffer, creator and director of the National Security Institute.

However, he continued, "should the DOJ is able to demonstrate the allegations stated and demonstrate the information is properly classified, his behavior may certainly have violated the law".

Prosecuting such a senior official for mishandling sensitive materials is "rare" but not unprecedented, noted Carrie Cordero, a senior fellow at the Center for a New American Security.

"Cases that involve classified information present difficulties to prosecute, but they may and are brought against equally junior and high-level personnel, from time to time," she said.

Parallels to Investigations into Trump and Biden

Trump similarly faced charges of improperly keeping sensitive materials at his Mar-a-Lago resort in Florida and hindering their recovery, but that case was eventually dismissed by a federal judge and voided by his re-election as president.

A special counsel additionally found that ex-President Joe Biden improperly maintained sensitive materials from his period as vice president, but did not criminally charge him.

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

Strict protocols regulate the management of sensitive materials. To win a conviction, the prosecution must prove that Bolton knew the information he was transmitting was restricted, and he had to intentionally transmit it to someone without authorization to obtain it.

"Due to the classified character of the information at issue in this case, we don't have a lot of particulars about why the prosecution contends things like the personal notes and the other information he communicated by electronic message, and the reason there were restricted," explained Mr Jaffer.

A Increasingly Conventional Legal Action

The process by which the Justice Department initiated this case will be closely examined, following Trump publicly expressed his wish to see his political opponents charged and several of those indictments materialized.

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

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

In contrast to Comey's short, concise charge, Bolton's was a increasingly "conventional" filing that "explicitly sets forth the particulars concerning the facts and situation here," Mr Lesko said.

"It appears reasonably consistent with a long line of precedents... where government officials improperly handled and shared sensitive information."