How this John Bolton Case Differs Significantly from Other Trump Critics

Former President Donald Trump has consistently shown his wish to see critics investigated, applying influence on the DOJ to prosecute ex FBI Director James Comey and New York Attorney General Letitia James.

"We cannot postpone any longer, it's killing our standing and trustworthiness," the president wrote recently in a social media message.

"I was impeached twice, and charged me (5 times!)" he declared, referencing the four criminal cases he encountered after leaving the White House in 2021 and James's lawsuit.

Both have since been charged, in cases that numerous experts have stated seem to be driven by politics and difficult to succeed in legal proceedings.

But the most recent charges against a Trump critic, former security advisor John Bolton, stand apart, legal experts and ex-prosecutors say.

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

This Specifics of the Case

Bolton has been criminally indicted on national allegations pertaining to the supposed improper handling of sensitive materials. Since leaving the White House in 2019, he has emerged as a vocal presidential opponent, going so far as to describe him "stunningly uninformed" and unsuitable for the presidency in his book.

Experts say that while there may be political reasons to go after Bolton, the procedures used to obtain an charge and the evidence compiled against him suggest a possibly more substantial legal argument than the DOJ brought against James.

"These actions that's being claimed is simultaneously more serious and seems 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, authorities alleged that Bolton put the nation at danger by improperly retaining and transmitting sensitive documents to relatives using insecure means, including AOL. Some of the materials were marked top secret.

The indictment states that at one point a unauthorized user accessed to Bolton's account where documents were kept and sent an seeming warning to cause "the biggest controversy since Hillary [Clinton]'s emails were released".

Bolton entered a not guilty plea during a court appearance on recently to 18 distinct charges of mishandling sensitive materials.

Retribution or a Substantial Legal Argument?

The schedule of his indictment - arriving on the tails of charges against Comey - has renewed questions about external influence on the justice system.

Trump once suggested Bolton should be in prison, and called him a "sleazebag". Bolton, for his role, authored a book about his experience in the Trump government that was sharply negative of the president.

"There's no question that the schedule of this charge, when combined with additional cases, has raised questions about the strength of these allegations, and the reason these counts are being brought now," stated Jamil Jaffer, founder and executive director of the National Security Institute.

Nevertheless, he continued, "should the DOJ is capable to demonstrate the facts alleged and demonstrate the information is correctly classified, his conduct may certainly have broken the statute".

Charging such a high-ranking official for improperly handling sensitive materials is "uncommon" but not without precedent, noted Carrie Cordero, a senior fellow at the Center for a New American Security.

"Situations that involve sensitive materials pose difficulties to prosecute, but they may and are brought against equally junior and high-level personnel, from occasionally," she said.

Parallels to Investigations into Trump and Biden

Trump similarly faced charges of wrongfully storing classified documents at his Mar-a-Lago resort in Florida and obstructing their return, but that case was eventually dismissed by a federal judge and voided by his return as president.

A special counsel also determined that ex-President Joe Biden wrongfully maintained sensitive materials from his time as vice president, but failed to criminally charge him.

Bolton's case bears similarities to Trump's classified documents matters, said Mr Lesko, who also held a senior national security position at the Justice Department.

Rigorous procedures regulate the management of classified documents. To win a guilty verdict, the prosecution must demonstrate that Bolton knew the material he was sending was classified, and he had to knowingly transfer it to someone not entitled to obtain it.

"Due to the classified character of the material at issue in this case, we lack a great deal of particulars about why the government believes elements like the personal notes and the additional information he shared by email, and the reason 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 openly expressed his desire to see his political opponents prosecuted and some of those indictments came to fruition.

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

"The Bolton case and ultimately the indictment seemed to have followed the standard procedure including the regulations and norms within the DOJ," he stated.

In contrast to Comey's short, concise indictment, Bolton's was a increasingly "traditional" filing that "explicitly sets forth the details concerning the circumstances and circumstances here," Mr Lesko said.

"It seems fairly aligned with a long line of precedents... where public servants improperly handled and shared classified material."