🔗 Share this article

Ex-President Donald Trump has repeatedly expressed his wish to see opponents investigated, exerting influence on the Justice Department to prosecute former FBI Director James Comey and New York Attorney General Letitia James.

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

"I was impeached me, and charged me (five times!)" he declared, 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 numerous specialists have said appear to be driven by politics and difficult to succeed in legal proceedings.

But the latest allegations against a Trump critic, ex national security adviser John Bolton, differ significantly, legal experts and ex-prosecutors say.

"I would say, comparing Bolton's charges 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 national allegations pertaining to the supposed mishandling of sensitive materials. After departing the White House in 2019, he has emerged as a outspoken presidential opponent, going so far as to describe him "stunningly uninformed" and unsuitable for office in his memoir.

Experts contend that while there may be political reasons to target Bolton, the methods used to obtain an indictment and the proof gathered against him suggest a potentially stronger case than the Justice Department presented against James.

"This misconduct that's being alleged is simultaneously more serious and appears to have occurred over a significant period of time," said Carissa Byrne Hessick, a academic at the University of North Carolina School of Law.

Throughout his tenure as Trump's security advisor, and after his 2019 White House departure, authorities alleged that Bolton put the country at risk by improperly retaining and sending sensitive documents to family members using insecure means, including AOL. Several of the documents were labeled highly classified.

The charge states that at one point a hacker gained access to Bolton's account where files were stored and sent an apparent warning to cause "the biggest scandal since Hillary [Clinton]'s emails were released".

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

Retribution or a Substantial Legal Argument?

The timing of his indictment - arriving on the heels of allegations against Comey - has revived questions about political pressure on the justice system.

Trump once implied Bolton belonged in prison, and called him a "disreputable person". Bolton, for his part, wrote a publication about his time in the Trump administration that was sharply negative of the leader.

"There's no question that the schedule of this charge, when combined with others, has raised questions about the strength of these charges, and the reason these counts are being brought at this time," stated Jamil Jaffer, founder and executive director of the National Security Institute.

However, he continued, "if the DOJ is capable to prove the allegations stated and show the information is correctly classified, his conduct may certainly have violated the law".

Charging such a senior official for improperly handling sensitive materials is "rare" but not unprecedented, said Carrie Cordero, a senior fellow at the Center for a New American Security.

"Situations that involve sensitive materials present challenges to try, but they can and are filed against equally junior and senior personnel, from occasionally," she explained.

Similarities to Examinations into Former President and President

Trump similarly encountered allegations of improperly keeping classified documents at his Mar-a-Lago resort in Florida and hindering their recovery, but that matter was ultimately dismissed by a court official and voided by his re-election as leader.

A special counsel additionally determined that ex-President Joe Biden improperly stored classified documents from his period as second-in-command, but did not prosecute him.

Bolton's case bears similarities to Trump's classified documents issues, said Mr Lesko, who also held a senior security role at the Justice Department.

Strict protocols regulate the handling of classified documents. To secure a conviction, the prosecution must demonstrate that Bolton was aware the material he was transmitting was classified, and he had to intentionally transmit it to someone without authorization to receive it.

"Because of the classified nature of the material at issue in this matter, we lack a great deal of details about the reasons the government believes things like the diary entries and the other information he communicated by electronic message, and the reason there were classified," explained Mr Jaffer.

A Increasingly Traditional Prosecution

The process by which the Justice Department brought this legal action will be closely examined, after Trump openly expressed his wish to see his political opponents prosecuted and several of those indictments materialized.

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

"The Bolton case and ultimately the charge appeared to have followed the regular procedure including the regulations and standards within the DOJ," he stated.

In contrast to Comey's short, concise indictment, Bolton's was a increasingly "traditional" filing that "explicitly outlines the particulars involving the circumstances and circumstances here," Mr Lesko said.

"It appears reasonably aligned with a series of cases... where public servants mishandled and shared classified material."