Why this Bolton Case Differs Substantially from Additional Former President Critics
Ex-President Donald Trump has consistently shown his wish to see critics investigated, exerting pressure on the Justice Department to charge former FBI Director James Comey and New York Attorney General Letitia James.
"We cannot postpone any longer, it's damaging our reputation and credibility," the president stated last month in a Truth Social post.
"I was impeached me, and indicted me (five times!)" he said, referencing the multiple legal proceedings he faced after leaving the White House in 2021 and James's lawsuit.
Each have since been charged, in cases that numerous experts have stated seem to be politically motivated and challenging to win in legal proceedings.
But the latest allegations against a Trump critic, ex security advisor John Bolton, stand apart, legal experts and ex-prosecutors say.
"I would say, comparing Bolton's case to James' is like comparing two different things," said Mark Lesko, a former acting US attorney for the Eastern District of New York.
This Specifics of the Legal Situation
Bolton has been formally charged on federal charges related to the supposed mishandling of sensitive materials. Since leaving the White House in 2019, he has become a vocal presidential opponent, even to call him "stunningly uninformed" and unfit for office in his memoir.
Experts contend that while there may be political motivations to go after Bolton, the procedures used to secure an charge and the evidence compiled against him indicate a possibly more substantial case than the DOJ presented against Comey.
"This misconduct 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 academic at the University of North Carolina School of Law.
During his time as Trump's national security adviser, and after his 2019 White House departure, prosecutors claimed that Bolton put the country at danger by improperly retaining and transmitting classified information to relatives using unprotected methods, including AOL. Several of the materials were labeled highly classified.
The indictment alleges that at a certain time a hacker gained access to Bolton's system where documents were kept and sent an apparent warning to cause "the biggest controversy since Hillary [Clinton]'s emails were leaked".
Bolton entered a not guilty plea during a court appearance on recently to 18 separate charges of improperly handling sensitive materials.
Retribution or a Substantial Case?
The schedule of his charge - arriving on the heels of allegations against James - has revived concerns about external influence on the legal system.
Trump once implied Bolton belonged in prison, and described him a "sleazebag". Bolton, for his part, wrote a publication about his experience in the Trump administration that was sharply negative of the leader.
"Undoubtedly that the schedule of this indictment, when combined with additional cases, has prompted doubts about the validity of these charges, and the reason these counts are being filed at this time," stated Jamil Jaffer, founder and executive director of the National Security Institute.
However, he added, "if the Justice Department is capable to prove the allegations stated and show the information is correctly designated, his conduct may certainly have violated the law".
Prosecuting such a high-ranking figure for improperly handling classified documents is "rare" but not unprecedented, said Carrie Cordero, a senior fellow at the Center for a New American Security.
"Cases that involve sensitive materials pose challenges to try, but they can and are brought against equally junior and high-level personnel, from occasionally," she explained.
Parallels to Investigations into Trump and President
Trump similarly encountered allegations of wrongfully keeping classified documents at his Mar-a-Lago property in Florida and hindering their recovery, but that matter was eventually thrown out by a federal judge and voided by his return as president.
A special counsel also determined that ex-President Joe Biden improperly maintained classified documents from his period as vice president, but did not prosecute him.
Bolton's situation bears similarities to Trump's sensitive materials matters, said Mr Lesko, who previously held a senior national security position at the Justice Department.
Rigorous protocols govern the handling of classified documents. To secure a conviction, the government must demonstrate that Bolton knew the information he was transmitting was classified, and he had to intentionally transmit it to someone without authorization to receive it.
"Because of the sensitive character of the information at issue in this matter, we lack a lot of particulars about why the government contends things like the diary entries and the other information he shared by electronic message, and why there were classified," explained Mr Jaffer.
A More Traditional Legal Action
The procedure by which the DOJ brought this legal action will be closely examined, after Trump openly expressed his wish to see his critics charged and several of those charges materialized.
But Mr Lesko indicated in Bolton's case, prosecutors seem to have adhered to protocol.
"This Bolton case and eventually the charge appeared to have followed the standard process including the regulations and standards within the DOJ," he said.
In contrast to Comey's short, two-page indictment, Bolton's was a increasingly "conventional" document that "clearly outlines the particulars concerning the facts and circumstances in this instance," Mr Lesko commented.
"It seems reasonably aligned with a long line of precedents... where public servants mishandled and transmitted sensitive information."
