🔗 Share this article Why this Bolton Case Differs Significantly from Additional Former President Critics Former national security adviser John Bolton arrives at court on recently. Former President Donald Trump has repeatedly expressed his desire to see opponents investigated, exerting influence on the DOJ to charge former FBI Director James Comey and New York Attorney General Letitia James. "We can't delay any longer, it's killing our reputation and credibility," the leader wrote recently in a Truth Social post. "They impeached twice, and charged me (five times!)" he declared, referencing the multiple legal proceedings he encountered after departing the White House in 2021 and James's civil case. Both have since been charged, in cases that many specialists have said seem to be politically motivated and difficult to win in legal proceedings. But the latest charges against a Trump critic, ex national security adviser John Bolton, differ significantly, legal experts and former prosecutors say. "I would say, contrasting Bolton's charges 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 Bolton's Case Bolton has been formally charged on federal charges pertaining to the supposed mishandling of classified information. Since departing the White House in 2019, he has become a outspoken presidential opponent, even to describe him "remarkably ignorant" and unsuitable for office in his book. 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 suggest a possibly stronger legal argument than the DOJ brought against Comey. "This misconduct that's being alleged is simultaneously more severe and seems to have occurred over a significant duration," commented Carissa Byrne Hessick, a professor at the University of North Carolina School of Law. During his tenure as Trump's security advisor, and following his 2019 White House departure, prosecutors claimed that Bolton placed the country at danger by wrongfully keeping and transmitting classified information to family members using insecure means, including AOL. Some of the materials were labeled highly classified. The indictment alleges that at a certain time a hacker gained access to Bolton's system where documents were stored and transmitted an seeming threat to cause "the largest controversy since Hillary [Clinton]'s emails were released". Bolton pleaded not guilty during a court appearance on Friday to 18 separate counts of mishandling classified information. Retribution or a Substantial Legal Argument? The timing of his indictment - arriving on the heels of allegations against James - has revived concerns about external influence on the legal system. Trump once implied Bolton belonged in prison, and called him a "disreputable person". Bolton, for his role, wrote a publication about his time in the Trump government that was highly critical of the leader. "There's no question that the schedule of this charge, when paired with additional cases, has prompted questions about the strength of these allegations, and why these counts are being filed now," said Jamil Jaffer, founder and director of the National Security Institute. However, he continued, "if the DOJ is capable to prove the facts alleged and show the material is correctly classified, his behavior may certainly have broken the law". Charging such a senior official for mishandling sensitive materials is "uncommon" but not without precedent, noted Carrie Cordero, a expert at the Center for a New American Security. "Situations that involve classified information pose difficulties to prosecute, but they may and are brought against equally low-level and high-level officials, from occasionally," she said. Parallels to Examinations into Former President and Biden Trump likewise encountered charges of improperly storing sensitive materials 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 return as leader. A special counsel also determined that ex-President Joe Biden improperly stored sensitive materials from his period as vice president, but failed to prosecute him. Bolton's case shares characteristics to Biden's sensitive materials issues, said Mr Lesko, who also held a top national security position at the DOJ. Strict protocols govern the handling of classified documents. To secure a conviction, the government must prove that Bolton was aware the information he was sending was restricted, and he had to intentionally transmit it to someone not entitled to obtain it. "Due to the sensitive character of the material at issue in this matter, we lack a lot of details about why the prosecution believes elements like the personal notes and the additional material he communicated by electronic message, and the reason there were restricted," said Mr Jaffer. A Increasingly Conventional Prosecution The process by which the DOJ initiated this legal action will be closely examined, following Trump publicly posted his wish to see his political opponents prosecuted and several of those indictments came to fruition. But Mr Lesko said in Bolton's situation, authorities appear to have adhered to standard procedure. "The Bolton case and eventually the indictment appeared to have observed the standard procedure including the rules and standards within the Department of Justice," he stated. In contrast to Comey's short, concise indictment, Bolton's was a more "conventional" filing that "clearly sets forth the particulars involving the circumstances and circumstances here," Mr Lesko said. "It appears fairly aligned with a series of cases... where government officials improperly handled and shared classified material."