Why case against John Bolton is not like the others against Trump critics

President Donald Trump has made no secret of his desire to investigate his critics, and has pressured the Justice Department to prosecute former FBI Director James Comey and New York Attorney General Letitia James.

“We cannot delay any longer. This is killing our reputation and credibility,” the president wrote last month in a post on Truth Social.

“They impeached me twice, and charged me (5 times!),” he said, referring to the four criminal cases he faced after leaving the White House in 2021 and James’ civil case.

They have since been charged, in cases that many experts said appear politically motivated and difficult to win in court.

But the latest charges against a Trump critic, former national security adviser John Bolton, are different from each other, legal specialists and former prosecutors say.

“I would say that comparing Bolton to Comey and James is like comparing apples to oranges,” said Mark Lesko, former acting U.S. Attorney for the Eastern District of New York.

Bolton was criminally indicted on federal charges related to alleged mishandling of classified information. Since leaving the White House in 2019, he has become an outspoken critic of Trump, even calling him “astonishingly ignorant” and unfit for office in his memoir.

Experts say that although there may be political reasons for pursuing Bolton, the procedures used to obtain an indictment and the evidence collected against him suggest a potentially stronger case than the one the Justice Department brought against Comey or James.

“The alleged misconduct is much more serious and appears to have occurred over a long 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 after his departure from the White House in 2019, prosecutors alleged that Bolton put the country at risk by keeping classified information and improperly transmitting it to family members using unsecured means, including AOL. Some documents are classified as top secret.

The indictment alleges that a hacker at some point gained access to Bolton’s account where documents were stored and sent an apparent threat to cause “the biggest scandal since Hillary.” [Clinton]”‘s emails were leaked.

Bolton pleaded not guilty during his court appearance on Friday to 18 separate charges of mishandling classified information.

The timing of his indictment – which comes on the heels of the charges against Comey and James – has renewed questions about political pressure on the justice system.

Trump once referred to Bolton’s place in prison, calling him a “field.” For his part, Bolton wrote a book about his time in the Trump administration, and was highly critical of the president.

“There is no doubt that the timing of this indictment, when combined with others, raises questions about the strength of these charges, and why these charges are being brought now,” said Jamil Jaafar, founder and executive director of the National Security Institute at Antonin Scalia Law School at George Mason University.

But he added: “If the Department of Justice is able to prove the alleged facts and properly demonstrate that the information is classified, his conduct likely violated the law.”

Carrie Cordero, a senior fellow at the Center for a New American Security, said that accusing such a high-ranking official of mishandling classified documents is “rare” but not unprecedented.

“Cases involving classified information present challenges to prosecution, but they can be brought against high- and low-level officials, from time to time,” she said.

Likewise, Trump faced charges of improperly storing classified documents at his Mar-a-Lago resort in Florida and obstructing their return, but that case was ultimately dismissed by a federal judge and overturned by his re-election as president.

A special counsel also found that former President Joe Biden improperly stored classified documents from his time as vice president, but did not bring criminal charges against him.

Lesko, who also held a senior national security position at the Justice Department, said Bolton’s case bore similarities to Trump and Biden’s classified documents cases.

Strict procedures govern the handling of confidential documents. To win a conviction, the government must prove that Bolton knew that the information he was passing on was confidential, and he would have knowingly passed it on to someone who was not entitled to it.

“Due to the classified nature of the material involved in this case, we don’t have a lot of details about why the government believed things like the diary entries and other information he emailed, and why they were classified,” Mr. Jaafar said.

The process by which the Justice Department brought this case will be under scrutiny, after Trump publicly stated his desire to prosecute his political opponents, and some of those indictments materialized.

But Mr. Lesko said in the Bolton case, prosecutors appear to have followed protocol.

“Bolton’s prosecution and ultimately indictment appear to have followed the regular process, including rules and standards within the Department of Justice,” he said.

Lesko said that unlike Comey’s brief, two-page indictment, Bolton’s indictment was a more “conventional” document that “clearly outlines the details of the facts and circumstances here.”

“It seems fairly consistent with a long line of cases… where government officials mishandled and passed on classified material.”