🔗 Share this article

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

"We cannot postpone any longer, it's killing our reputation and trustworthiness," the president wrote recently in a Truth Social post.

"They impeached me, and charged me (5 times!)" he said, mentioning the four criminal cases he encountered after departing the White House in 2021 and James's civil case.

Both have since been indicted, in cases that numerous experts have said appear to be politically motivated and difficult to succeed in legal proceedings.

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

"In my opinion, comparing Bolton's case to James' is like comparing two different things," stated Mark Lesko, a ex acting US attorney for the Eastern District of New York.

This Details of the Case

Bolton has been formally charged on federal charges pertaining to the supposed improper handling of sensitive materials. Since departing the White House in 2019, he has become a outspoken presidential opponent, even to describe him "stunningly uninformed" and unfit for the presidency in his memoir.

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

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

Throughout his time as Trump's national security adviser, and following his 2019 White House exit, authorities alleged that Bolton put the nation at risk by improperly retaining and transmitting sensitive documents to family members 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 documents were stored 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 court appearance on recently to 18 separate counts of improperly handling sensitive materials.

Political Motivation or a Substantial Case?

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

Trump previously implied Bolton belonged in jail, and called him a "sleazebag". Bolton, for his role, authored a publication about his time in the Trump government that was highly critical of the president.

"Undoubtedly that the schedule of this charge, when paired with others, has raised doubts about the strength of these charges, and the reason these charges are being brought now," stated Jamil Jaffer, creator and director of the National Security Institute.

However, he added, "if the DOJ is capable to demonstrate the facts alleged and show the material is properly designated, his behavior may very well have broken the law".

Prosecuting such a senior figure for mishandling 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 sensitive materials pose difficulties to try, but they may and are brought against equally junior and high-level officials, from time to time," she said.

Similarities to Investigations into Former President and President

Trump likewise encountered allegations of wrongfully storing sensitive materials at his Mar-a-Lago property in Florida and hindering their recovery, but that matter was ultimately dismissed by a federal judge and voided by his re-election as president.

A independent investigator additionally determined that ex-President Joe Biden wrongfully maintained sensitive materials from his period as vice president, but failed to prosecute him.

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

Rigorous procedures regulate the management of sensitive materials. To secure a guilty verdict, the government must demonstrate that Bolton knew the information he was sending was classified, and he had to knowingly transmit it to someone without authorization to receive it.

"Because of the sensitive character of the information at issue in this case, we lack a lot of particulars about the reasons the prosecution believes things like the diary entries and the additional material he shared by electronic message, and why 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, following Trump publicly posted his desire to see his political opponents charged and some of those indictments came to fruition.

But Mr Lesko indicated in Bolton's case, prosecutors appear to have adhered to protocol.

"This Bolton prosecution and eventually the charge seemed to have followed the standard procedure including the rules and standards within the Department of Justice," he said.

In contrast to Comey's brief, two-page charge, Bolton's was a increasingly "traditional" document that "explicitly sets forth the details involving the facts and situation here," Mr Lesko commented.

"It seems fairly consistent with a series of precedents... where public servants mishandled and transmitted classified material."