How this John Bolton Legal Situation Differs Substantially from Additional Former President Critics
Ex-President Donald Trump has consistently expressed his wish to see critics investigated, exerting pressure on the Justice Department to prosecute ex FBI Director James Comey and New York Attorney General Letitia James.
"We can't delay any longer, it's damaging our reputation and credibility," the president stated recently in a Truth Social post.
"They impeached me, and charged me (five times!)" he declared, referencing the multiple legal proceedings he faced after departing the White House in 2021 and James's lawsuit.
Each have subsequently been charged, in cases that many experts have said appear to be politically motivated and challenging to win in court.
But the latest allegations against a presidential opponent, ex national security adviser John Bolton, stand apart, legal specialists and former prosecutors say.
"In my opinion, comparing Bolton's case to James' is like comparing two different things," said Mark Lesko, a ex acting US attorney for the Eastern District of New York.
This Details of Bolton's Case
Bolton has been criminally indicted on federal charges related to the alleged mishandling of sensitive materials. Since leaving the White House in 2019, he has emerged as a outspoken presidential opponent, going so far as to describe him "remarkably ignorant" and unsuitable for office in his book.
Specialists contend that while there may be political motivations to target Bolton, the methods used to secure an charge and the evidence compiled against him suggest a possibly stronger legal argument than the Justice Department brought against Comey.
"These actions that's being claimed is both more serious and seems to have taken place 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 security advisor, and following his 2019 White House departure, authorities alleged that Bolton placed the country at risk by wrongfully keeping and sending classified information to family members using insecure means, including AOL. Several of the materials were labeled top secret.
The indictment states that at one point a hacker accessed to Bolton's account where files were stored and sent an seeming threat to cause "the biggest scandal since Hillary [Clinton]'s emails were leaked".
Bolton entered a not guilty plea during a hearing on Friday to eighteen distinct charges of improperly handling classified information.
Political Motivation or a Substantial Case?
The timing of his indictment - coming on the heels of allegations against James - has revived concerns about external influence on the legal system.
Trump previously implied Bolton belonged in jail, and called him a "disreputable person". Bolton, for his part, authored a book about his time in the Trump government that was sharply negative of the leader.
"Undoubtedly that the timing of this indictment, when paired with others, has prompted doubts about the strength of these allegations, and the reason these charges are being brought at this time," said Jamil Jaffer, founder and director of the National Security Institute.
However, he added, "should the Justice Department is able to demonstrate the allegations alleged and demonstrate the information is properly designated, his behavior may very well have violated the statute".
Charging such a senior official for mishandling classified documents is "rare" but not without precedent, said Carrie Cordero, a expert at the Center for a New American Security.
"Cases that concern sensitive materials pose challenges to prosecute, but they can and are filed against equally junior and high-level personnel, from occasionally," she explained.
Parallels to Investigations into Trump 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 eventually dismissed by a federal judge and negated by his re-election as leader.
A special counsel also determined that former President Joe Biden wrongfully maintained sensitive materials from his period as vice president, but failed to prosecute him.
Bolton's case bears similarities to Biden's classified documents matters, noted Mr Lesko, who previously held a senior security position at the DOJ.
Rigorous procedures govern the handling of sensitive materials. To secure a conviction, the government must demonstrate that Bolton knew the information he was sending was restricted, and he had to intentionally transmit it to someone not entitled to obtain it.
"Because of the sensitive nature of the information at issue in this case, we lack a great deal of details about why the prosecution contends elements like the diary entries and the additional information he shared by electronic message, and why there were classified," explained Mr Jaffer.
A Increasingly Conventional Legal Action
The procedure by which the Justice Department brought this case will be under scrutiny, after Trump publicly posted his desire to see his critics charged and several of those charges 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 charge seemed to have observed the standard procedure including the regulations and norms within the DOJ," he stated.
In contrast to Comey's short, concise charge, Bolton's was a more "conventional" filing that "clearly outlines the particulars involving the circumstances and circumstances here," Mr Lesko commented.
"It appears reasonably consistent with a long line of cases... where government officials mishandled and shared sensitive information."