🔗 Share this article

Ex-President Donald Trump has consistently shown his wish to see opponents investigated, exerting influence on the DOJ to charge ex FBI Director James Comey and New York Attorney General Letitia James.

"We cannot postpone further, it's killing our standing and credibility," the leader stated last month in a Truth Social message.

"They impeached twice, and charged me (five times!)" he declared, mentioning the multiple legal proceedings he encountered after leaving the White House in 2021 and James's lawsuit.

Each have subsequently been indicted, in situations that numerous experts have stated seem to be driven by politics and challenging to succeed in court.

But the most recent charges against a presidential opponent, ex national security adviser John Bolton, stand apart, legal specialists and former prosecutors say.

"I would say, contrasting Bolton's charges to Comey's is like equating two different things," said Mark Lesko, a ex acting US attorney for the Eastern District of New York.

The Details of the Legal Situation

Bolton has been criminally indicted on federal charges related to the alleged mishandling of classified information. After leaving the White House in 2019, he has emerged as a vocal presidential opponent, even to call him "stunningly uninformed" 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 charge and the evidence compiled against him suggest a possibly more substantial case than the DOJ brought against Comey.

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

Throughout his tenure as Trump's security advisor, and after his 2019 White House departure, authorities claimed that Bolton put the nation at risk by wrongfully keeping and transmitting sensitive documents to relatives using unprotected methods, including AOL. Some of the materials were labeled highly classified.

The charge states that at one point a unauthorized user accessed to Bolton's system where documents were stored and transmitted an apparent threat to cause "the biggest controversy since Hillary [Clinton]'s emails were leaked".

Bolton pleaded not guilty during a hearing on Friday to eighteen separate charges of mishandling classified information.

Political Motivation or a Strong Legal Argument?

The timing of his charge - coming on the heels of charges against James - has revived questions about political pressure on the justice system.

Trump once suggested Bolton belonged in prison, and called him a "sleazebag". Bolton, for his part, wrote a book about his experience in the Trump administration that was highly critical of the president.

"There's no question that the schedule of this indictment, when combined with others, has prompted doubts about the strength of these charges, and the reason these counts are being filed at this time," stated Jamil Jaffer, founder and executive director of the National Security Institute.

However, he continued, "if the DOJ is able to demonstrate the facts stated and demonstrate the information is properly designated, his conduct may very well have broken the statute".

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

"Cases that concern classified information pose difficulties to try, but they can and are filed against equally low-level and senior personnel, from occasionally," she said.

Similarities to Investigations into Former President and President

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

A special counsel also found that ex-President Joe Biden improperly maintained sensitive materials from his period as vice president, but did not prosecute him.

Bolton's case shares characteristics to Trump's classified documents matters, said Mr Lesko, who previously held a senior security role at the Justice Department.

Rigorous protocols regulate the management of classified documents. To win a guilty verdict, the prosecution must prove that Bolton was aware the material he was transmitting was restricted, and he had to intentionally transfer it to someone not entitled to receive it.

"Because of the sensitive character of the material at question in this case, we lack a great deal of particulars about the reasons the prosecution contends things like the diary entries and the additional material he shared by electronic message, and the reason there were classified," said Mr Jaffer.

A Increasingly Traditional Legal Action

The procedure by which the Justice Department initiated this case will be under scrutiny, after Trump openly expressed his wish to see his critics charged and several of those indictments materialized.

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

"The Bolton prosecution and eventually the charge seemed to have observed the standard procedure including the rules and standards within the Department of Justice," he stated.

Unlike Comey's brief, concise charge, Bolton's was a increasingly "traditional" document that "clearly sets forth the details involving the facts and situation here," Mr Lesko commented.

"It appears reasonably aligned with a long line of cases... where government officials improperly handled and shared classified material."