How the John Bolton Case Differs Substantially from Other Former President Opponents
Former President Donald Trump has repeatedly expressed his desire to see critics probed, applying influence on the Justice Department to charge former FBI Director James Comey and New York Attorney General Letitia James.
"We cannot postpone further, it's damaging our reputation and credibility," the leader stated last month in a social media message.
"They impeached twice, and charged me (5 times!)" he declared, mentioning the multiple legal proceedings he encountered after departing the White House in 2021 and James's lawsuit.
Both have since been charged, in situations that many experts have stated seem to be driven by politics and challenging to succeed in court.
But the most recent charges against a Trump critic, ex national security adviser John Bolton, differ significantly, legal experts and ex-prosecutors assert.
"I would say, comparing Bolton's case to Comey's is like equating two different things," said 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 supposed mishandling of sensitive materials. After departing the White House in 2019, he has emerged as a vocal Trump critic, even to describe him "remarkably ignorant" and unsuitable for office in his memoir.
Experts say that while there may be political motivations to target Bolton, the procedures used to secure an indictment and the evidence compiled against him indicate a possibly more substantial legal argument than the DOJ presented against James.
"This misconduct that's being claimed is simultaneously more severe and seems to have taken place over a significant period of time," commented Carissa Byrne Hessick, a academic at the University of North Carolina School of Law.
Throughout his tenure as Trump's security advisor, and following his 2019 White House departure, authorities 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 top secret.
The charge states that at one point a unauthorized user accessed to Bolton's account where documents were stored and sent an seeming warning to cause "the largest scandal since Hillary [Clinton]'s emails were leaked".
Bolton pleaded not guilty during a hearing on Friday to 18 distinct counts of improperly handling classified information.
Political Motivation or a Strong Legal Argument?
The timing of his charge - coming on the tails of charges against Comey - has renewed concerns about external influence on the legal system.
Trump once suggested Bolton should be in jail, and called him a "disreputable person". Bolton, for his role, authored a publication about his experience in the Trump administration that was highly critical of the president.
"Undoubtedly that the timing of this indictment, when combined with additional cases, has prompted doubts about the strength of these allegations, and the reason these charges are being brought at this time," said Jamil Jaffer, creator and executive director of the National Security Institute.
However, he added, "if the Justice Department is capable to demonstrate the allegations stated and show the information is correctly classified, his conduct may very well have violated the statute".
Prosecuting such a senior figure for mishandling classified documents is "uncommon" but not unprecedented, said Carrie Cordero, a senior fellow at the Center for a New American Security.
"Cases that involve sensitive materials present difficulties to prosecute, but they can and are brought against equally junior and senior personnel, from occasionally," she explained.
Parallels to Examinations into Trump and Biden
Trump similarly faced charges of wrongfully storing sensitive materials at his Mar-a-Lago property 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 independent investigator also determined that former President Joe Biden wrongfully stored sensitive materials from his period as vice president, but failed to criminally charge him.
Bolton's case shares characteristics 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 management of sensitive materials. To secure a conviction, the government must demonstrate that Bolton was aware the information he was sending was restricted, and he had to knowingly transmit it to someone not entitled to receive it.
"Because of the classified character of the material at question in this case, we lack a lot of details about why the prosecution contends things like the diary entries and the additional material he communicated by email, and why there were restricted," said Mr Jaffer.
A More Conventional Legal Action
The procedure by which the DOJ brought this legal action will be under scrutiny, following Trump publicly expressed his desire to see his political opponents charged and several of those charges materialized.
But Mr Lesko indicated in Bolton's case, prosecutors seem to have adhered to protocol.
"The Bolton case and ultimately the indictment appeared to have observed the regular procedure including the rules and norms within the Department of Justice," he stated.
Unlike Comey's brief, concise charge, Bolton's was a increasingly "traditional" filing that "clearly outlines the details concerning the facts and situation here," Mr Lesko commented.
"It appears fairly aligned with a long line of cases... where government officials improperly handled and transmitted classified material."
