🔗 Share this article

Ex-President Donald Trump has consistently expressed his wish to see critics probed, applying pressure on the Justice Department to charge 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 wrote recently in a Truth Social post.

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

Each have since been indicted, in cases that numerous specialists have said appear to be politically motivated and difficult to win in legal proceedings.

But the latest charges against a Trump critic, ex national security adviser John Bolton, differ significantly, legal specialists and ex-prosecutors assert.

"I would say, contrasting Bolton's charges to James' is like equating apples to oranges," stated Mark Lesko, a ex federal prosecutor for the Eastern District of New York.

The Details of the Case

Bolton has been criminally indicted on national allegations related to the supposed mishandling of sensitive materials. After departing the White House in 2019, he has emerged as a outspoken Trump critic, going so far as to describe him "remarkably ignorant" and unfit for the presidency in his memoir.

Specialists say that while there may be political reasons to go after Bolton, the procedures used to obtain an indictment and the evidence gathered against him indicate a potentially more substantial case than the DOJ brought against Comey.

"This misconduct that's being alleged is both more severe and appears to have taken place over a significant duration," said Carissa Byrne Hessick, a professor at the University of North Carolina School of Law.

During his time as Trump's national security adviser, and following his 2019 White House exit, authorities alleged that Bolton placed the nation at risk by improperly keeping and sending classified information to family members using unprotected methods, including AOL. Some of the materials were labeled top secret.

The indictment states that at a certain time a hacker accessed to Bolton's account where files were kept and transmitted an apparent warning to cause "the largest scandal since Hillary [Clinton]'s emails were released".

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

Retribution or a Strong Case?

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

Trump previously suggested Bolton should be in jail, and called him a "disreputable person". Bolton, for his role, wrote a book about his time in the Trump government that was sharply negative of the leader.

"Undoubtedly that the schedule of this indictment, when paired with others, has prompted questions about the strength of these allegations, and the reason these counts are being brought at this time," stated Jamil Jaffer, founder and director of the National Security Institute.

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

Charging such a high-ranking official for mishandling sensitive materials is "uncommon" but not unprecedented, noted Carrie Cordero, a senior fellow at the Center for a New American Security.

"Cases that concern sensitive materials pose difficulties to prosecute, but they can and are filed against equally low-level and high-level personnel, from time to time," she explained.

Similarities to Investigations into Trump and President

Trump similarly faced allegations of improperly storing sensitive materials at his Mar-a-Lago resort in Florida and hindering their recovery, but that matter was eventually thrown out by a court official and voided by his re-election as president.

A special counsel also found that former President Joe Biden wrongfully stored classified documents from his period as vice president, but did not prosecute him.

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

Rigorous procedures govern the handling of sensitive materials. To win a conviction, the prosecution must demonstrate that Bolton was aware the material he was sending was restricted, and he had to knowingly transmit it to someone not entitled to obtain it.

"Due to the sensitive character of the information at question in this matter, we lack a lot of details about the reasons the government believes things like the personal notes and the other information he shared by electronic message, and the reason there were classified," explained Mr Jaffer.

A More Conventional Legal Action

The procedure by which the DOJ initiated this legal action will be under scrutiny, after Trump openly expressed his wish to see his political opponents charged and some of those charges came to fruition.

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

"The Bolton case and eventually the charge appeared to have followed the standard procedure including the regulations and standards within the Department of Justice," he stated.

Unlike Comey's brief, concise charge, Bolton's was a increasingly "conventional" filing that "explicitly sets forth the details involving the circumstances and circumstances in this instance," Mr Lesko said.

"It seems reasonably aligned with a series of cases... where public servants mishandled and shared classified material."