🔗 Share this article

Former President Donald Trump has consistently expressed his wish to see opponents investigated, exerting pressure on the Justice Department to charge ex FBI Director James Comey and New York Attorney General Letitia James.

"We can't delay any longer, it's damaging our standing and credibility," the president wrote recently in a social media post.

"I was impeached me, and indicted me (5 times!)" he said, referencing the four criminal cases he faced after departing the White House in 2021 and James's civil case.

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

But the most recent allegations against a Trump critic, ex security advisor John Bolton, stand apart, legal specialists and ex-prosecutors assert.

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

This Specifics of the Legal Situation

Bolton has been criminally indicted on national allegations related to the alleged mishandling of sensitive materials. Since departing the White House in 2019, he has become a outspoken Trump critic, going so far as to call him "remarkably ignorant" and unsuitable for office in his book.

Specialists contend that while there may be political motivations to go after Bolton, the methods used to secure an indictment and the proof compiled against him suggest a possibly stronger case than the DOJ presented against Comey.

"This misconduct that's being claimed is simultaneously more serious and seems 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 national security adviser, and following his 2019 White House exit, authorities alleged that Bolton put the nation at risk by improperly retaining and sending classified information to relatives using unprotected methods, including AOL. Several of the materials were marked highly classified.

The charge states that at one point a unauthorized user accessed to Bolton's system where files were kept and transmitted an seeming warning to cause "the largest scandal since Hillary [Clinton]'s emails were released".

Bolton pleaded not guilty during a hearing on recently to 18 distinct counts of mishandling classified information.

Retribution or a Strong Case?

The schedule of his indictment - coming on the heels of allegations against James - has revived concerns about external influence on the justice system.

Trump once implied Bolton should be in prison, and called him a "sleazebag". Bolton, for his role, wrote a publication about his experience in the Trump administration that was highly critical of the president.

"Undoubtedly that the timing of this charge, when paired with others, has raised questions about the validity of these charges, and why these charges are being filed at this time," said Jamil Jaffer, founder and executive director of the National Security Institute.

However, he continued, "should the DOJ is able to prove the facts alleged and demonstrate the material is correctly designated, his conduct may very well have broken the statute".

Charging such a senior figure for improperly handling sensitive materials is "rare" but not unprecedented, noted Carrie Cordero, a senior fellow at the Center for a New American Security.

"Situations that concern sensitive materials present challenges to try, but they may and are brought against both junior and high-level officials, from occasionally," she said.

Similarities to Examinations into Former President and Biden

Trump similarly encountered charges of wrongfully storing sensitive materials at his Mar-a-Lago property in Florida and obstructing their recovery, but that matter was eventually dismissed by a federal judge and negated by his return as president.

A special counsel additionally determined that ex-President Joe Biden improperly maintained sensitive materials from his time as second-in-command, but did not criminally charge him.

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

Rigorous protocols govern the handling of classified documents. To win a guilty verdict, the prosecution must prove that Bolton knew the information he was sending was classified, and he had to knowingly transmit it to someone without authorization to obtain it.

"Due to the classified character of the information at question in this case, we don't have a lot of details about the reasons the government contends elements like the diary entries and the additional material he communicated by email, and the reason there were classified," said Mr Jaffer.

A Increasingly Conventional Legal Action

The procedure by which the DOJ brought this case will be under scrutiny, after Trump openly expressed his desire to see his political opponents charged and some of those indictments came to fruition.

But Mr Lesko said in Bolton's case, authorities appear to have adhered to protocol.

"The Bolton prosecution and ultimately the charge seemed to have observed the standard process including the regulations and standards within the DOJ," he stated.

Unlike Comey's short, two-page charge, Bolton's was a increasingly "conventional" filing that "explicitly sets forth the particulars concerning the circumstances and circumstances in this instance," Mr Lesko commented.

"It seems fairly consistent with a series of cases... where public servants improperly handled and transmitted classified material."