How the Bolton Case Stands Apart Substantially from Other Trump Critics

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

"We cannot postpone any longer, it's damaging our reputation and trustworthiness," the president stated recently in a Truth Social post.

"They impeached twice, and indicted me (5 times!)" he declared, referencing the four criminal cases he faced after departing the White House in 2021 and James's lawsuit.

Both have since been indicted, in cases that numerous specialists have said seem to be politically motivated and challenging to succeed in court.

But the latest allegations against a Trump critic, former national security adviser John Bolton, stand apart, legal experts and ex-prosecutors say.

"I would say, contrasting Bolton's charges to James' is like equating apples to oranges," said Mark Lesko, a ex federal prosecutor for the Eastern District of New York.

The Specifics of Bolton's Legal Situation

Bolton has been criminally indicted on national allegations related to the alleged improper handling of sensitive materials. Since leaving the White House in 2019, he has emerged as a outspoken presidential opponent, going so far as to call him "stunningly uninformed" and unfit for the presidency in his memoir.

Specialists contend that while there may be political reasons to go after Bolton, the methods used to obtain an indictment and the proof compiled against him indicate a potentially stronger case than the DOJ brought against James.

"These actions that's being claimed is both more severe and appears to have taken place over a significant period of time," 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 exit, prosecutors alleged that Bolton put the country at danger by wrongfully keeping and transmitting classified information to relatives using unprotected methods, including AOL. Several of the materials were labeled highly classified.

The charge states that at a certain time a hacker accessed to Bolton's system where documents were kept and sent an apparent threat to cause "the biggest controversy since Hillary [Clinton]'s emails were leaked".

Bolton pleaded not guilty during a court appearance on Friday to eighteen distinct charges of improperly handling classified information.

Political Motivation or a Strong Case?

The schedule of his indictment - arriving on the heels of allegations against Comey - has renewed concerns about external influence on the legal system.

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

"Undoubtedly that the timing of this indictment, when combined with additional cases, has prompted doubts about the validity of these allegations, and the reason these counts are being filed now," said Jamil Jaffer, creator and executive director of the National Security Institute.

However, he continued, "should the DOJ is able to prove the facts alleged and show the information is correctly classified, his behavior may certainly have violated the law".

Prosecuting such a senior official for improperly handling classified documents is "rare" but not without precedent, said Carrie Cordero, a senior fellow at the Center for a New American Security.

"Cases that concern sensitive materials present difficulties to prosecute, but they can and are filed against both low-level and high-level officials, from occasionally," she said.

Parallels to Examinations into Trump and President

Trump likewise encountered allegations of wrongfully storing sensitive materials at his Mar-a-Lago resort in Florida and obstructing their return, but that case was eventually dismissed by a federal judge and negated by his re-election as president.

A special counsel additionally found that former President Joe Biden improperly maintained sensitive materials from his period as vice president, but did not prosecute him.

Bolton's situation shares characteristics to Trump's classified documents matters, noted 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 knew the material he was sending was restricted, and he had to knowingly transfer it to someone not entitled to obtain it.

"Because of the classified nature of the information at question in this matter, we lack a lot of details about why the government believes elements like the personal notes and the other information he communicated by electronic message, and why there were classified," explained Mr Jaffer.

A Increasingly Conventional Legal Action

The procedure by which the DOJ brought this case will be closely examined, following Trump publicly posted his wish to see his critics prosecuted and several of those indictments came to fruition.

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

"The Bolton prosecution and ultimately the indictment seemed to have observed the standard procedure including the rules and norms within the DOJ," he said.

Unlike Comey's brief, two-page indictment, Bolton's was a more "traditional" filing that "explicitly outlines the details concerning the facts and situation here," Mr Lesko commented.

"It seems fairly consistent with a long line of precedents... where public servants improperly handled and shared sensitive information."