🔗 Share this article

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

"We cannot postpone any longer, it's killing our reputation and credibility," the leader stated last month in a social media post.

"I was impeached me, and charged me (five times!)" he said, mentioning the multiple legal proceedings he encountered after leaving the White House in 2021 and James's civil case.

Both have subsequently been indicted, in situations that numerous specialists have said seem to be driven by politics and difficult to succeed in court.

But the latest allegations against a presidential opponent, former national security adviser John Bolton, differ significantly, legal experts and former prosecutors assert.

"I would say, contrasting Bolton's case to James' is like equating two different things," said Mark Lesko, a former federal prosecutor 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 improper handling of classified information. After leaving the White House in 2019, he has become a vocal Trump critic, going so far as to call him "stunningly uninformed" and unsuitable for office in his memoir.

Specialists contend that while there may be political reasons to go after Bolton, the methods used to obtain an charge and the proof gathered against him indicate a possibly stronger legal argument than the Justice Department presented against James.

"These actions that's being claimed is simultaneously more serious and appears to have taken place over a considerable period of time," commented Carissa Byrne Hessick, a professor at the University of North Carolina School of Law.

During his tenure as Trump's security advisor, and following his 2019 White House departure, prosecutors claimed that Bolton put the country at danger by wrongfully retaining and sending classified information to relatives using unprotected methods, including AOL. Several of the documents were marked highly classified.

The charge alleges that at a certain time a hacker accessed to Bolton's account where files were stored and transmitted an apparent warning to cause "the largest scandal since Hillary [Clinton]'s emails were released".

Bolton entered a not guilty plea during a hearing on Friday to 18 distinct charges of improperly handling classified information.

Retribution or a Strong Legal Argument?

The timing of his indictment - arriving on the tails of charges against Comey - has revived questions about external influence on the legal system.

Trump once implied Bolton belonged in prison, and called him a "sleazebag". Bolton, for his role, wrote a publication about his time in the Trump government that was sharply negative of the president.

"Undoubtedly that the timing of this indictment, when combined with others, has prompted questions about the strength of these charges, and the reason these counts are being brought now," said Jamil Jaffer, creator and executive director of the National Security Institute.

Nevertheless, he continued, "if the Justice Department is capable to prove the allegations alleged and demonstrate the information is properly designated, his behavior may very well have violated the law".

Charging such a high-ranking 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.

"Cases that involve sensitive materials pose difficulties to try, but they may and are filed against both junior and high-level personnel, from time to time," she explained.

Parallels to Investigations into Trump and President

Trump likewise encountered allegations of improperly keeping classified documents at his Mar-a-Lago property in Florida and hindering their return, but that case was ultimately dismissed by a federal judge and voided by his re-election as leader.

A special counsel additionally determined that ex-President Joe Biden wrongfully stored classified documents from his period as second-in-command, but failed to prosecute him.

Bolton's case bears similarities to Biden's sensitive materials matters, noted Mr Lesko, who also held a senior security position at the DOJ.

Rigorous procedures govern the management of classified documents. To win a guilty verdict, the government must demonstrate that Bolton was aware the material he was transmitting was restricted, and he had to knowingly transmit it to someone without authorization to receive it.

"Because of the classified character of the information at question in this case, we lack a great deal of details about the reasons the government believes things like the personal notes and the other information he shared by electronic message, and the reason there were classified," explained Mr Jaffer.

A More Traditional Legal Action

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

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

"The Bolton prosecution and eventually the indictment seemed to have followed the regular procedure including the rules and norms within the DOJ," he said.

Unlike Comey's brief, two-page charge, Bolton's was a more "conventional" filing that "explicitly sets forth the details involving the circumstances and situation here," Mr Lesko commented.

"It seems fairly consistent with a long line of cases... where government officials mishandled and transmitted classified material."