🔗 Share this article

Former President Donald Trump has consistently shown his desire to see critics probed, applying pressure on the DOJ to charge ex FBI Director James Comey and New York Attorney General Letitia James.

"We can't delay any longer, it's killing our standing and trustworthiness," the leader wrote recently in a Truth Social post.

"I was impeached me, and indicted me (five times!)" he declared, referencing the four criminal cases he encountered after departing the White House in 2021 and James's lawsuit.

Both have since been indicted, in situations that many specialists have said appear to be driven by politics and difficult to succeed in court.

But the most recent allegations against a presidential opponent, former security advisor John Bolton, differ significantly, legal experts and ex-prosecutors say.

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

The Specifics of Bolton's Case

Bolton has been formally charged on national allegations related to the alleged mishandling of classified information. Since departing the White House in 2019, he has emerged as a outspoken Trump critic, even to call him "stunningly uninformed" and unfit for the presidency in his memoir.

Experts say that while there may be political reasons to target Bolton, the methods used to secure an indictment and the evidence compiled against him suggest a potentially stronger case than the DOJ presented against James.

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

Throughout his time as Trump's national security adviser, and after his 2019 White House exit, authorities claimed that Bolton put the nation at risk by improperly retaining and transmitting classified information to family members using insecure means, including AOL. Several of the materials were marked highly classified.

The charge states that at a certain time a hacker gained access to Bolton's system 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 court appearance on recently to 18 separate counts of improperly handling sensitive materials.

Political Motivation or a Strong Case?

The timing of his indictment - arriving on the heels of charges against James - has renewed concerns about political pressure on the legal system.

Trump once implied Bolton should be in prison, and called him a "sleazebag". Bolton, for his part, wrote a book about his time in the Trump administration that was highly critical of the president.

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

However, he added, "if the DOJ is able to prove the allegations stated and demonstrate the material is properly designated, his behavior may certainly have violated the statute".

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

"Cases that concern sensitive materials present challenges to prosecute, but they may and are brought against both low-level and senior officials, from time to time," she said.

Parallels to Examinations into Trump and Biden

Trump similarly encountered allegations of wrongfully storing classified documents at his Mar-a-Lago property in Florida and obstructing their recovery, but that matter was eventually thrown out by a federal judge and voided by his return as leader.

A special counsel additionally found that former President Joe Biden wrongfully maintained classified documents from his time as second-in-command, but did not criminally charge him.

Bolton's case shares characteristics to Biden's sensitive materials matters, noted Mr Lesko, who previously held a top national security position at the Justice Department.

Strict procedures regulate the handling of sensitive materials. To win a guilty verdict, the government must prove that Bolton knew the material he was transmitting was classified, and he had to intentionally transfer it to someone not entitled to obtain it.

"Because of the sensitive nature of the material at issue in this case, we lack a lot of particulars about the reasons the government believes things like the diary entries and the additional material he communicated by electronic message, and the reason there were restricted," explained Mr Jaffer.

A Increasingly Traditional Legal Action

The procedure by which the Justice Department brought this case will be under scrutiny, after Trump openly posted his wish to see his political opponents prosecuted and several of those charges materialized.

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

"The Bolton prosecution and ultimately the indictment appeared to have observed the standard procedure including the regulations and standards within the Department of Justice," he stated.

In contrast to Comey's brief, concise charge, Bolton's was a more "conventional" filing that "explicitly outlines the details concerning the circumstances and circumstances in this instance," Mr Lesko said.

"It appears reasonably consistent with a series of precedents... where public servants improperly handled and shared classified material."