Why the John Bolton Case Differs Substantially from Additional Former President Critics
Former President Donald Trump has repeatedly expressed his wish to see critics investigated, applying pressure on the Justice Department to charge ex FBI Director James Comey and New York Attorney General Letitia James.
"We cannot postpone further, it's damaging our reputation and trustworthiness," the president wrote last month in a Truth Social post.
"I was impeached twice, and indicted me (five times!)" he said, mentioning the four criminal cases he faced after departing the White House in 2021 and James's lawsuit.
Each have since been charged, in situations that many experts have said seem to be politically motivated and difficult to win in legal proceedings.
But the most recent charges against a Trump critic, former security advisor John Bolton, differ significantly, legal specialists and ex-prosecutors assert.
"In my opinion, contrasting Bolton's case to James' is like comparing two different things," said Mark Lesko, a ex federal prosecutor for the Eastern District of New York.
The Specifics of Bolton's Case
Bolton has been criminally indicted on federal charges related to the alleged improper handling of sensitive materials. Since departing the White House in 2019, he has emerged as a outspoken presidential opponent, going so far as to describe him "remarkably ignorant" and unfit for the presidency in his memoir.
Specialists say that while there may be political motivations to go after Bolton, the procedures used to secure an indictment and the evidence gathered against him suggest a possibly stronger legal argument than the DOJ presented against James.
"This misconduct that's being alleged is both more serious and seems to have occurred 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 security advisor, and following his 2019 White House departure, prosecutors claimed that Bolton put the country at danger by improperly keeping and sending classified information to relatives using insecure means, including AOL. Some of the materials were marked highly classified.
The indictment alleges that at one point a unauthorized user accessed to Bolton's account where documents were stored and transmitted an apparent 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 18 distinct counts of mishandling sensitive materials.
Retribution or a Substantial Legal Argument?
The timing of his charge - arriving on the tails of allegations against James - has renewed concerns about external influence on the justice system.
Trump once implied Bolton should be in prison, and described him a "disreputable person". Bolton, for his part, authored a publication about his experience in the Trump administration that was sharply negative of the leader.
"Undoubtedly that the timing of this indictment, when combined with additional cases, has prompted questions about the strength of these allegations, and the reason these charges are being filed now," said Jamil Jaffer, founder and executive director of the National Security Institute.
However, he continued, "should the DOJ is capable to demonstrate the facts stated and demonstrate the information is correctly classified, his conduct may certainly have violated the law".
Charging such a high-ranking official for mishandling classified documents is "rare" but not unprecedented, said Carrie Cordero, a expert at the Center for a New American Security.
"Cases that concern classified information present difficulties to prosecute, but they can and are brought against equally low-level and senior personnel, from occasionally," she explained.
Parallels to Investigations into Trump and President
Trump similarly faced allegations of wrongfully storing sensitive materials at his Mar-a-Lago resort in Florida and obstructing their recovery, but that matter was eventually dismissed by a court official and voided by his re-election as president.
A special counsel additionally determined that ex-President Joe Biden wrongfully maintained classified documents from his period as vice president, but failed to prosecute him.
Bolton's case bears similarities to Trump's classified documents matters, said Mr Lesko, who also held a senior security position at the Justice Department.
Rigorous procedures govern the management of sensitive materials. To win a guilty verdict, the government must demonstrate that Bolton knew the information he was sending was restricted, and he had to knowingly transmit it to someone without authorization to receive it.
"Due to the classified character of the material at issue in this matter, we lack a great deal of details about why the government believes things like the diary entries and the additional material he communicated by email, and why there were classified," said Mr Jaffer.
A More Conventional Legal Action
The procedure by which the DOJ brought this legal action will be under scrutiny, following Trump openly posted his desire to see his political opponents prosecuted and some of those charges materialized.
But Mr Lesko said in Bolton's case, authorities appear to have adhered to protocol.
"This Bolton case and eventually the charge appeared to have followed the standard procedure including the rules and norms within the Department of Justice," he stated.
In contrast to Comey's short, concise indictment, Bolton's was a more "traditional" filing that "clearly sets forth the details involving the facts and situation here," Mr Lesko said.
"It seems fairly consistent with a series of precedents... where government officials mishandled and shared sensitive information."
