🔗 Share this article

Ex-President Donald Trump has consistently expressed his wish to see opponents investigated, exerting pressure on the DOJ to charge former FBI Director James Comey and New York Attorney General Letitia James.

"We cannot postpone any longer, it's killing our standing and credibility," the president stated last month in a social media 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 civil case.

Both have since been indicted, in cases that many experts have said seem to be politically motivated and challenging to succeed in court.

But the most recent allegations against a Trump critic, former national security adviser John Bolton, stand apart, legal experts and former prosecutors assert.

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

This Details of Bolton's Legal Situation

Bolton has been formally charged on national allegations pertaining to the supposed improper handling of sensitive materials. Since leaving the White House in 2019, he has become a outspoken presidential opponent, even to call him "remarkably ignorant" and unsuitable for office in his memoir.

Specialists say that while there may be political motivations to target Bolton, the procedures used to obtain an indictment and the evidence compiled against him indicate a possibly stronger legal argument than the Justice Department brought against Comey.

"This misconduct that's being claimed is both more severe and appears to have taken place over a significant period of time," 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 after his 2019 White House exit, authorities alleged that Bolton placed the nation at danger by wrongfully retaining and sending sensitive documents to relatives using insecure means, including AOL. Some of the materials were marked top secret.

The charge alleges that at a certain time 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 released".

Bolton entered a not guilty plea during a hearing on Friday to 18 separate charges of improperly handling classified information.

Political Motivation or a Strong Legal Argument?

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

Trump once suggested Bolton should be in jail, and called him a "sleazebag". Bolton, for his part, authored a publication about his time in the Trump administration that was highly critical of the leader.

"Undoubtedly that the timing of this charge, when combined with additional cases, has prompted questions about the validity of these allegations, and the reason these counts are being brought at this time," said Jamil Jaffer, founder and executive director of the National Security Institute.

However, he added, "if the DOJ is able to prove the facts alleged and demonstrate the information is correctly classified, his behavior may very well have violated the law".

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

"Situations that involve sensitive materials pose challenges to prosecute, but they can and are filed against equally low-level and high-level officials, from occasionally," she explained.

Similarities to Examinations into Trump and President

Trump likewise faced allegations of improperly storing sensitive materials at his Mar-a-Lago property in Florida and obstructing their recovery, but that case was ultimately thrown out by a court official and negated by his return as president.

A independent investigator additionally determined that ex-President Joe Biden improperly maintained sensitive materials from his time as second-in-command, but did not prosecute him.

Bolton's situation bears similarities to Biden's sensitive materials issues, noted Mr Lesko, who also held a top national security role at the DOJ.

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

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

A More Conventional Prosecution

The procedure by which the DOJ initiated this legal action will be closely examined, after Trump openly expressed his wish to see his critics prosecuted and several of those indictments materialized.

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

"The Bolton case and eventually the indictment seemed to have followed the regular process including the rules and norms within the DOJ," he said.

Unlike Comey's short, concise indictment, Bolton's was a more "traditional" filing that "clearly outlines the details concerning the circumstances and circumstances in this instance," Mr Lesko said.

"It seems reasonably aligned with a series of precedents... where public servants mishandled and transmitted sensitive information."