🔗 Share this article

Ex-President Donald Trump has consistently expressed his wish to see critics probed, applying pressure on the Justice Department to prosecute ex FBI Director James Comey and New York Attorney General Letitia James.

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

"They impeached me, and indicted me (5 times!)" he declared, referencing the four criminal cases he faced after leaving 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 politically motivated and difficult to win in court.

But the most recent allegations against a presidential opponent, former national security adviser John Bolton, differ significantly, legal experts and former prosecutors assert.

"In my opinion, contrasting Bolton's charges to Comey's is like comparing apples to oranges," said Mark Lesko, a former acting US attorney for the Eastern District of New York.

The Details of the Legal Situation

Bolton has been criminally indicted on national allegations pertaining to the supposed mishandling of sensitive materials. Since departing the White House in 2019, he has become a vocal presidential opponent, going so far as to describe him "remarkably ignorant" and unsuitable for office in his book.

Experts contend that while there may be political reasons to go after Bolton, the methods used to secure an indictment and the proof gathered against him indicate a possibly more substantial legal argument than the DOJ brought against Comey.

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

Throughout his tenure as Trump's security advisor, and following his 2019 White House departure, prosecutors claimed that Bolton put the country at risk by wrongfully retaining and sending sensitive documents to family members using insecure means, including AOL. Several of the materials were labeled top secret.

The charge states that at one point a hacker gained access to Bolton's system where documents were kept and transmitted an apparent warning to cause "the biggest controversy since Hillary [Clinton]'s emails were leaked".

Bolton entered a not guilty plea during a court appearance on Friday to 18 separate counts of improperly handling classified information.

Retribution or a Strong Case?

The schedule of his charge - coming on the heels of charges against James - has revived questions about political pressure on the justice system.

Trump previously implied Bolton should be in jail, and called him a "sleazebag". Bolton, for his part, wrote a book about his experience in the Trump government that was highly critical of the president.

"There's no question that the timing of this charge, when paired with others, has prompted questions about the validity of these allegations, and why these charges are being brought at this time," stated Jamil Jaffer, creator and executive director of the National Security Institute.

However, he continued, "if the Justice Department is capable to prove the allegations alleged and show the information is correctly classified, his conduct may certainly have broken the law".

Charging such a high-ranking official for improperly handling sensitive materials is "uncommon" but not without precedent, said Carrie Cordero, a expert at the Center for a New American Security.

"Situations that concern classified information pose challenges to try, but they may and are filed against equally junior and high-level officials, from time to time," she explained.

Similarities to Examinations into Former President and President

Trump similarly faced charges of improperly keeping classified documents at his Mar-a-Lago property in Florida and obstructing their return, but that matter was ultimately thrown out by a court official and negated by his re-election as president.

A special counsel also determined that ex-President Joe Biden wrongfully stored sensitive materials from his period as vice president, but failed to criminally charge him.

Bolton's situation bears similarities to Trump's classified documents matters, noted Mr Lesko, who also held a senior security role at the DOJ.

Rigorous protocols regulate the handling of sensitive materials. To win a conviction, the prosecution must prove that Bolton was aware the material he was transmitting was classified, and he had to intentionally transfer it to someone not entitled to receive it.

"Because of the classified nature of the information at issue in this case, we lack a lot of details about why the government believes things like the personal notes and the additional information he communicated by email, and why there were restricted," explained Mr Jaffer.

A Increasingly Conventional Prosecution

The procedure by which the Justice Department initiated this legal action will be under scrutiny, after Trump openly posted his desire to see his political opponents prosecuted and several of those charges came to fruition.

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

"The Bolton case and eventually the charge appeared to have observed the regular process including the rules and standards within the Department of Justice," he stated.

Unlike Comey's brief, two-page charge, Bolton's was a increasingly "traditional" filing that "explicitly outlines the particulars concerning the facts and circumstances in this instance," Mr Lesko said.

"It seems reasonably consistent with a series of precedents... where public servants improperly handled and shared sensitive information."