🔗 Share this article

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

"We can't delay any longer, it's damaging our standing and trustworthiness," the president stated last month in a Truth Social message.

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

Both have subsequently been indicted, in cases that many specialists have stated appear to be driven by politics and challenging to succeed in court.

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

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

The Specifics of the Legal Situation

Bolton has been formally charged on federal charges pertaining to the supposed improper handling of classified information. After leaving the White House in 2019, he has emerged as a outspoken presidential opponent, even to describe him "remarkably ignorant" and unsuitable for the presidency in his memoir.

Experts contend that while there may be political motivations to go after Bolton, the methods used to obtain an indictment and the evidence compiled against him suggest a possibly stronger case than the DOJ presented against James.

"This misconduct that's being alleged is simultaneously more severe and seems to have taken place over a significant period of time," 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 after his 2019 White House departure, prosecutors alleged that Bolton put the country at danger by improperly keeping and transmitting classified information to family members using insecure means, including AOL. Some of the documents were labeled highly classified.

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

Bolton entered a not guilty plea during a court appearance on recently to 18 separate charges of mishandling sensitive materials.

Retribution or a Substantial Legal Argument?

The schedule of his charge - coming on the heels of allegations against Comey - has revived questions about external influence on the legal system.

Trump once suggested Bolton belonged in jail, and described him a "sleazebag". Bolton, for his part, authored a publication about his time in the Trump government that was sharply negative of the leader.

"Undoubtedly that the timing of this charge, when combined with additional cases, has raised doubts about the validity of these allegations, and the reason these charges are being filed now," said Jamil Jaffer, creator and executive director of the National Security Institute.

Nevertheless, he continued, "should the DOJ is able to demonstrate the facts alleged and demonstrate the information is correctly classified, his conduct may certainly have broken the statute".

Charging such a senior figure for improperly handling classified documents is "rare" but not without precedent, noted Carrie Cordero, a expert at the Center for a New American Security.

"Situations that concern sensitive materials pose challenges to try, but they can and are brought against both junior and senior personnel, from occasionally," she said.

Parallels to Examinations into Trump and Biden

Trump likewise faced allegations of improperly storing sensitive materials at his Mar-a-Lago property in Florida and hindering their recovery, but that matter was eventually thrown out by a court official and negated by his return as president.

A independent investigator additionally found that former President Joe Biden wrongfully maintained classified documents from his period as second-in-command, but failed to prosecute him.

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

Rigorous protocols regulate the management of sensitive materials. To secure a conviction, the prosecution must prove that Bolton was aware the information he was sending was restricted, and he had to intentionally transmit it to someone without authorization to receive it.

"Due to the sensitive character of the material at question in this case, we don't have a great deal of particulars about the reasons the prosecution contends elements like the diary entries and the other information he shared by electronic message, and the reason there were restricted," explained Mr Jaffer.

A Increasingly Conventional Legal Action

The process by which the Justice Department brought this legal action will be under scrutiny, following Trump openly posted his wish to see his political opponents charged and several of those indictments came to fruition.

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

"The Bolton prosecution and ultimately the charge appeared to have followed the regular process including the rules and norms within the DOJ," he said.

Unlike Comey's short, concise indictment, Bolton's was a increasingly "traditional" filing that "clearly outlines the details involving the circumstances and situation in this instance," Mr Lesko said.

"It appears reasonably aligned with a long line of precedents... where government officials improperly handled and transmitted sensitive information."