🔗 Share this article

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

"We cannot postpone further, it's killing our reputation and trustworthiness," the president stated last month in a Truth Social post.

"I was impeached twice, and indicted me (5 times!)" he said, mentioning the four criminal cases he encountered after leaving the White House in 2021 and James's lawsuit.

Both have subsequently been charged, in situations that many specialists have said seem to be driven by politics and challenging to win in legal proceedings.

But the latest charges against a presidential opponent, ex security advisor John Bolton, differ significantly, legal experts and former prosecutors say.

"In my opinion, 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 Specifics of the Case

Bolton has been criminally indicted on federal charges related to the alleged improper handling of sensitive materials. Since departing the White House in 2019, he has emerged as a vocal Trump critic, going so far as to describe him "stunningly uninformed" and unfit for the presidency in his book.

Experts contend that while there may be political reasons to target Bolton, the procedures used to obtain an indictment and the evidence compiled against him indicate a potentially stronger legal argument than the Justice Department presented against James.

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

During his tenure as Trump's national security adviser, and after his 2019 White House departure, prosecutors claimed that Bolton put the country at danger by improperly keeping and sending classified information to relatives using insecure means, including AOL. Several of the documents were marked top secret.

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

Bolton pleaded not guilty during a hearing on recently to 18 distinct counts of improperly handling sensitive materials.

Retribution or a Substantial Legal Argument?

The schedule of his indictment - arriving on the heels of allegations against Comey - has renewed concerns about external influence on the justice system.

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

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

Nevertheless, he added, "if the DOJ is capable to demonstrate the allegations alleged and demonstrate the material is correctly designated, his behavior may very well have broken the law".

Charging such a senior official for mishandling classified documents is "uncommon" but not unprecedented, noted Carrie Cordero, a expert at the Center for a New American Security.

"Situations that concern classified information present difficulties to try, but they may and are filed against both junior and high-level officials, from occasionally," she said.

Similarities to Investigations into Trump and President

Trump likewise faced charges of improperly storing classified documents at his Mar-a-Lago resort in Florida and hindering their recovery, but that case was ultimately thrown out by a federal judge and voided by his return as leader.

A special counsel also found that former President Joe Biden improperly maintained sensitive materials from his period as second-in-command, but failed to prosecute him.

Bolton's situation shares characteristics to Trump's classified documents issues, said Mr Lesko, who previously held a top security role at the DOJ.

Strict protocols govern the handling of sensitive materials. To secure a guilty verdict, the prosecution must demonstrate that Bolton knew the information he was sending was restricted, and he had to intentionally transmit it to someone without authorization to obtain it.

"Due to the sensitive character of the information at issue in this case, we lack a lot of particulars about the reasons the prosecution believes things like the personal notes and the other information he communicated by electronic message, and why there were restricted," explained Mr Jaffer.

A More Conventional Legal Action

The procedure by which the DOJ brought this case will be closely examined, following Trump openly posted his desire to see his critics charged and several of those indictments materialized.

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

"The Bolton prosecution and eventually the indictment appeared to have followed the regular procedure including the regulations and norms within the Department of Justice," he stated.

In contrast to Comey's brief, two-page charge, Bolton's was a more "traditional" document that "explicitly sets forth the details involving the circumstances and situation here," Mr Lesko said.

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