Why this Bolton Legal Situation Differs Significantly from Additional Former President Opponents
Former President Donald Trump has consistently expressed his wish to see opponents probed, applying pressure on the DOJ to prosecute ex FBI Director James Comey and New York Attorney General Letitia James.
"We can't delay further, it's killing our reputation and trustworthiness," the president wrote recently in a Truth Social message.
"They impeached me, and indicted me (5 times!)" he said, referencing the multiple legal proceedings he faced after departing the White House in 2021 and James's lawsuit.
Both have subsequently been indicted, in situations that many specialists have said appear to be driven by politics and difficult to succeed in legal proceedings.
But the latest charges against a Trump critic, ex national security adviser John Bolton, differ significantly, legal experts and former prosecutors assert.
"In my opinion, comparing Bolton's charges to James' is like comparing two different things," said Mark Lesko, a former acting US attorney for the Eastern District of New York.
The Specifics of the Case
Bolton has been formally charged on national allegations related to the alleged improper handling of sensitive materials. After leaving the White House in 2019, he has emerged as a outspoken Trump critic, going so far as to call him "remarkably ignorant" and unfit for office in his book.
Specialists say that while there may be political motivations to target Bolton, the methods used to secure an indictment and the proof gathered against him suggest a potentially stronger case than the DOJ presented against Comey.
"This misconduct that's being claimed is both more serious and appears to have occurred over a considerable duration," said Carissa Byrne Hessick, a professor at the University of North Carolina School of Law.
Throughout his time as Trump's national security adviser, and following his 2019 White House departure, prosecutors alleged that Bolton put the nation at danger by wrongfully retaining and transmitting classified information to relatives using insecure means, including AOL. Some of the materials were labeled highly classified.
The indictment alleges that at a certain time a unauthorized user accessed to Bolton's account where documents were kept 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 hearing on Friday to 18 distinct counts of mishandling sensitive materials.
Retribution or a Substantial Case?
The schedule of his indictment - coming on the heels of allegations against James - has renewed questions about external influence on the justice system.
Trump once implied Bolton belonged in prison, and described him a "disreputable person". Bolton, for his part, wrote a book about his time in the Trump government that was highly critical of the president.
"Undoubtedly that the timing of this indictment, when paired with others, has raised questions about the strength of these allegations, and why these counts are being brought now," stated Jamil Jaffer, creator and director of the National Security Institute.
However, he added, "should the Justice Department is capable to demonstrate the allegations alleged and demonstrate the information is properly classified, his conduct may certainly have broken the statute".
Prosecuting such a senior official for mishandling sensitive materials is "uncommon" but not unprecedented, said Carrie Cordero, a senior fellow at the Center for a New American Security.
"Cases that involve classified information present challenges to prosecute, but they can and are filed against both junior and senior officials, from occasionally," she said.
Parallels to Investigations into Trump and Biden
Trump similarly encountered allegations of improperly storing sensitive materials at his Mar-a-Lago property in Florida and obstructing their recovery, but that case was eventually dismissed by a federal judge and voided by his re-election as president.
A special counsel also determined that ex-President Joe Biden wrongfully stored classified documents from his time as vice president, but did not prosecute him.
Bolton's case shares characteristics to Biden's sensitive materials issues, said Mr Lesko, who previously held a top national security role at the DOJ.
Strict procedures govern the management of sensitive materials. To win a guilty verdict, the government 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 information at question in this case, we don't have a lot of particulars about the reasons the prosecution contends things like the personal notes and the other information he communicated by electronic message, and why there were restricted," said Mr Jaffer.
A More Conventional Prosecution
The procedure by which the Justice Department brought this legal action will be closely examined, after Trump publicly expressed his desire to see his critics charged and several of those charges materialized.
But Mr Lesko said in Bolton's case, authorities seem to have adhered to standard procedure.
"This Bolton case and eventually the charge appeared to have observed the regular process including the rules and standards within the Department of Justice," he said.
In contrast to Comey's short, concise charge, Bolton's was a increasingly "conventional" document that "clearly sets forth the details involving the facts and situation in this instance," Mr Lesko said.
"It appears reasonably aligned with a long line of precedents... where public servants improperly handled and transmitted classified material."
