🔗 Share this article

Former President Donald Trump has consistently shown his wish to see critics investigated, applying influence on the Justice Department to prosecute former FBI Director James Comey and New York Attorney General Letitia James.

"We cannot postpone further, it's damaging our reputation and trustworthiness," the leader stated last month in a social media post.

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

Each have subsequently been charged, in situations that many experts have stated seem to be politically motivated and difficult to win in court.

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

"In my opinion, contrasting Bolton's charges to Comey's is like equating apples to oranges," stated Mark Lesko, a former acting US attorney for the Eastern District of New York.

This Specifics of Bolton's Legal Situation

Bolton has been criminally indicted on federal charges related to the alleged improper handling of classified information. Since leaving the White House in 2019, he has emerged as a outspoken presidential opponent, going so far as to describe him "stunningly uninformed" and unfit for the presidency in his book.

Specialists say that while there may be political reasons to target Bolton, the procedures used to obtain an charge and the proof compiled against him indicate a potentially more substantial legal argument than the Justice Department presented against James.

"These actions that's being claimed is both more severe and appears to have occurred over a significant duration," said Carissa Byrne Hessick, a professor at the University of North Carolina School of Law.

During his tenure as Trump's security advisor, and after his 2019 White House exit, authorities alleged that Bolton put the country at risk by wrongfully retaining and transmitting classified information to relatives using unprotected methods, including AOL. Some of the materials were marked highly classified.

The charge states that at one point a hacker gained access to Bolton's account where documents were stored and transmitted an seeming warning to cause "the biggest scandal since Hillary [Clinton]'s emails were leaked".

Bolton entered a not guilty plea during a hearing on Friday to eighteen separate counts of mishandling sensitive materials.

Political Motivation or a Strong Case?

The schedule of his indictment - arriving on the tails of allegations against James - has revived questions about external influence on the legal system.

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

"Undoubtedly that the schedule of this charge, when paired with additional cases, has raised doubts about the validity of these charges, and why these counts are being brought now," said Jamil Jaffer, creator and director of the National Security Institute.

However, he added, "if the DOJ is able to demonstrate the facts stated and show the material is properly designated, his conduct may very well have violated the law".

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 difficulties to prosecute, but they may and are filed against equally junior and high-level personnel, from occasionally," she said.

Similarities to Investigations into Trump and President

Trump similarly encountered allegations of wrongfully keeping sensitive materials at his Mar-a-Lago resort in Florida and obstructing their return, but that case was eventually dismissed by a federal judge and voided by his re-election as president.

A independent investigator additionally determined that former President Joe Biden improperly maintained sensitive materials from his period as second-in-command, but did not prosecute him.

Bolton's situation bears similarities to Trump's sensitive materials matters, noted Mr Lesko, who also held a top national security role at the Justice Department.

Rigorous procedures govern the management of sensitive materials. To secure a conviction, the government must demonstrate that Bolton was aware the material he was sending was classified, and he had to intentionally transmit it to someone not entitled to receive it.

"Due to the classified nature of the material at question in this matter, we lack a lot of details about why the government contends things like the personal notes and the additional material he communicated by electronic message, and why there were classified," explained Mr Jaffer.

A More Traditional Prosecution

The procedure by which the Justice Department brought this case will be closely examined, after Trump openly expressed his desire to see his political opponents charged and several of those charges materialized.

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

"This Bolton case and ultimately the indictment appeared to have observed the regular process including the regulations and standards within the Department of Justice," he said.

In contrast to Comey's brief, concise charge, Bolton's was a more "traditional" document that "clearly sets forth the details concerning the circumstances and situation in this instance," Mr Lesko commented.

"It appears reasonably consistent with a long line of precedents... where public servants mishandled and shared sensitive information."