How this John Bolton Case Differs Substantially from Additional Former President Critics
Ex-President Donald Trump has consistently shown his wish to see critics probed, applying influence on the DOJ to prosecute ex FBI Director James Comey and New York Attorney General Letitia James.
"We cannot postpone further, it's damaging our standing and trustworthiness," the leader stated last month in a social media post.
"They impeached twice, and indicted me (5 times!)" he said, mentioning the multiple legal proceedings he encountered after leaving the White House in 2021 and James's lawsuit.
Each have since been indicted, in situations that many experts have said seem to be driven by politics and difficult to succeed in court.
But the latest charges against a presidential opponent, ex security advisor John Bolton, stand apart, legal experts and ex-prosecutors assert.
"In my opinion, comparing Bolton's case to Comey's is like comparing apples to oranges," stated Mark Lesko, a ex federal prosecutor for the Eastern District of New York.
The Specifics of the Case
Bolton has been formally charged on federal charges related to the alleged improper handling of sensitive materials. Since departing the White House in 2019, he has become a vocal Trump critic, going so far as to call him "stunningly uninformed" and unsuitable for the presidency in his book.
Experts contend that while there may be political reasons to go after Bolton, the procedures used to obtain an indictment and the evidence gathered against him indicate a potentially stronger case than the DOJ brought against Comey.
"These actions that's being claimed is both more serious and appears to have occurred over a considerable period of time," said Carissa Byrne Hessick, a professor at the University of North Carolina School of Law.
During his time as Trump's national security adviser, and following his 2019 White House exit, authorities claimed that Bolton put the country at danger by improperly retaining and transmitting classified information to relatives using insecure means, including AOL. Several of the documents were marked highly classified.
The indictment alleges that at one point a unauthorized user gained access to Bolton's system where documents were stored and transmitted an seeming threat to cause "the largest scandal since Hillary [Clinton]'s emails were leaked".
Bolton pleaded not guilty during a hearing on Friday to 18 separate charges of improperly handling sensitive materials.
Political Motivation or a Substantial Case?
The schedule of his indictment - arriving on the heels of allegations against James - has renewed concerns about external influence on the justice system.
Trump once implied Bolton belonged in jail, and described him a "disreputable person". Bolton, for his part, wrote a book about his experience in the Trump government that was highly critical of the leader.
"There's no question that the schedule of this indictment, when paired with additional cases, has raised doubts about the validity of these allegations, and why these counts are being brought now," stated Jamil Jaffer, founder and executive director of the National Security Institute.
However, he added, "if the DOJ is capable to prove the facts alleged and show the information is correctly designated, his behavior may very well have violated the law".
Prosecuting such a senior official for improperly handling classified documents is "rare" but not without precedent, 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 filed against equally low-level and senior officials, from time to time," she said.
Similarities to Investigations into Former President and President
Trump similarly encountered charges of wrongfully keeping classified documents at his Mar-a-Lago resort in Florida and hindering their recovery, but that matter was ultimately thrown out by a court official and negated by his return as leader.
A special counsel additionally determined that former President Joe Biden wrongfully stored classified documents from his time as second-in-command, but did not prosecute him.
Bolton's case bears similarities to Biden's classified documents matters, noted Mr Lesko, who also held a top national security position at the Justice Department.
Rigorous protocols regulate the handling of sensitive materials. To secure a conviction, the government must demonstrate that Bolton knew the information he was transmitting was restricted, and he had to knowingly transfer it to someone without authorization to receive it.
"Due to the classified nature of the information at issue in this matter, we lack a lot of particulars about why the government believes things like the diary entries and the other material he communicated by email, and why there were classified," said Mr Jaffer.
A More Conventional Prosecution
The process by which the Justice Department brought this case will be closely examined, after Trump publicly posted his wish to see his political opponents prosecuted and several of those indictments came to fruition.
But Mr Lesko indicated in Bolton's situation, prosecutors appear to have followed protocol.
"The Bolton case and ultimately the charge appeared to have followed the standard process including the regulations and standards within the DOJ," he stated.
In contrast to Comey's brief, two-page charge, Bolton's was a increasingly "traditional" document that "explicitly sets forth the particulars concerning the circumstances and situation here," Mr Lesko said.
"It seems fairly consistent with a long line of cases... where government officials mishandled and transmitted classified material."
