🔗 Share this article

Former President Donald Trump has repeatedly expressed his desire to see opponents probed, applying pressure on the DOJ to prosecute ex FBI Director James Comey and New York Attorney General Letitia James.

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

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

Each have subsequently been charged, in situations that many experts have said seem to be driven by politics and challenging to win in court.

But the latest allegations against a Trump critic, former security advisor John Bolton, differ significantly, legal specialists and former prosecutors assert.

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

The Details of Bolton's Case

Bolton has been formally charged on national allegations related to the alleged improper handling of sensitive materials. After leaving the White House in 2019, he has become a outspoken Trump critic, even to describe him "remarkably ignorant" and unfit for office in his memoir.

Experts contend that while there may be political motivations to target Bolton, the procedures used to secure an charge and the evidence gathered against him suggest a potentially stronger legal argument than the Justice Department presented against James.

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

During his time as Trump's security advisor, and after his 2019 White House exit, prosecutors alleged that Bolton placed the country at risk by wrongfully retaining and transmitting classified information to relatives using insecure means, including AOL. Several of the materials were marked top secret.

The charge alleges that at one point a hacker accessed to Bolton's account where files were kept and sent an apparent warning to cause "the largest controversy since Hillary [Clinton]'s emails were leaked".

Bolton entered a not guilty plea during a hearing on recently to 18 separate charges of mishandling classified information.

Political Motivation or a Substantial Legal Argument?

The schedule of his charge - coming on the heels of charges against James - has renewed concerns about external influence on the legal system.

Trump previously 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 sharply negative of the leader.

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

However, he continued, "if the DOJ is capable to demonstrate the allegations alleged and demonstrate the information is correctly classified, his behavior may very well have violated the statute".

Prosecuting such a senior official for improperly handling sensitive materials is "uncommon" but not without precedent, said Carrie Cordero, a senior fellow at the Center for a New American Security.

"Cases that concern sensitive materials present challenges to try, but they may and are filed against equally junior and senior officials, from occasionally," she said.

Similarities to Investigations into Former President and President

Trump likewise encountered charges of wrongfully storing classified documents at his Mar-a-Lago property in Florida and hindering their return, but that case was ultimately thrown out by a court official and voided by his re-election as president.

A independent investigator additionally determined that ex-President Joe Biden improperly stored sensitive materials from his period as second-in-command, but failed to prosecute him.

Bolton's situation bears similarities to Trump's sensitive materials matters, noted Mr Lesko, who also held a top security role at the Justice Department.

Strict procedures regulate the management of sensitive materials. To secure a conviction, the prosecution must demonstrate that Bolton was aware the information he was transmitting was restricted, and he had to knowingly transmit it to someone not entitled to receive it.

"Because of the sensitive nature of the material at issue in this matter, we don't have a lot of details about the reasons the prosecution contends elements like the personal notes and the additional material he shared by electronic message, and why there were restricted," said Mr Jaffer.

A Increasingly Traditional Legal Action

The procedure by which the DOJ brought this legal action will be closely examined, after Trump publicly expressed his wish to see his political opponents charged and some of those charges materialized.

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

"The Bolton prosecution and ultimately the charge appeared to have observed the regular process including the rules and norms within the Department of Justice," he said.

In contrast to Comey's brief, two-page indictment, Bolton's was a increasingly "traditional" document that "explicitly outlines the details concerning the circumstances and situation in this instance," Mr Lesko commented.

"It appears fairly aligned with a series of cases... where government officials improperly handled and shared classified material."