Former President Donald Trump has consistently expressed his wish to see opponents investigated, exerting pressure on the DOJ to prosecute former FBI Director James Comey and New York Attorney General Letitia James.
"We cannot postpone any longer, it's killing our standing and trustworthiness," the leader stated recently in a Truth Social message.
"I was impeached me, and indicted me (five times!)" he declared, referencing the multiple legal proceedings he faced after leaving the White House in 2021 and James's lawsuit.
Both have since been indicted, in situations that many experts have said seem to be politically motivated and challenging to succeed in court.
But the latest allegations against a presidential opponent, former national security adviser John Bolton, stand apart, legal experts and ex-prosecutors say.
"In my opinion, comparing Bolton's case to Comey's is like comparing apples to oranges," said Mark Lesko, a former acting US attorney for the Eastern District of New York.
The Specifics of the Legal Situation
Bolton has been formally charged on federal charges related to the supposed improper handling of classified information. Since departing the White House in 2019, he has emerged as a vocal presidential opponent, even to describe him "stunningly uninformed" and unfit for office in his memoir.
Specialists say that while there may be political motivations to go after Bolton, the methods used to obtain an indictment and the proof compiled against him suggest a potentially stronger legal argument than the Justice Department presented against James.
"This misconduct that's being alleged is both more severe and appears to have taken place over a significant duration," said Carissa Byrne Hessick, a academic at the University of North Carolina School of Law.
Throughout his time as Trump's national security adviser, and following his 2019 White House departure, authorities claimed that Bolton placed the country at risk by improperly retaining and transmitting sensitive documents to family members using unprotected methods, including AOL. Some of the documents were labeled top secret.
The indictment states that at a certain time a unauthorized user accessed to Bolton's account where files were kept and transmitted an apparent warning to cause "the biggest scandal since Hillary [Clinton]'s emails were leaked".
Bolton entered a not guilty plea during a hearing on recently to 18 separate charges of improperly handling classified information.
Retribution or a Substantial Legal Argument?
The schedule of his charge - coming on the tails of charges against Comey - has renewed questions about political pressure on the legal system.
Trump once suggested Bolton should be in jail, and called him a "disreputable person". Bolton, for his part, wrote a publication about his experience in the Trump administration that was sharply negative of the president.
"There's no question that the timing of this indictment, when paired with others, has prompted questions about the validity of these allegations, and the reason these charges are being brought at this time," stated Jamil Jaffer, creator 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 designated, his behavior may very well have broken the statute".
Charging such a high-ranking figure for mishandling sensitive materials is "uncommon" but not without precedent, said Carrie Cordero, a senior fellow at the Center for a New American Security.
"Situations that involve sensitive materials pose challenges to try, but they can and are brought against both junior and senior officials, from time to time," she said.
Parallels to Investigations into Trump and President
Trump likewise encountered charges of improperly storing sensitive materials at his Mar-a-Lago resort in Florida and hindering their return, but that matter was ultimately dismissed by a federal judge and negated by his return as leader.
A special counsel also found that ex-President Joe Biden wrongfully stored classified documents from his period as second-in-command, but did not prosecute him.
Bolton's situation bears similarities to Biden's classified documents issues, noted Mr Lesko, who previously held a senior national security position at the DOJ.
Strict protocols regulate the handling of sensitive materials. To win a conviction, the government must prove that Bolton was aware the information he was sending was restricted, and he had to intentionally transfer it to someone not entitled to receive it.
"Due to the sensitive character of the material at issue in this case, we lack a great deal of particulars about the reasons the government believes things like the personal notes and the other material he shared by email, and the reason there were restricted," explained Mr Jaffer.
A More Traditional Prosecution
The process by which the DOJ initiated this legal action will be closely examined, after Trump openly posted his desire to see his political opponents prosecuted and several of those indictments came to fruition.
But Mr Lesko indicated in Bolton's situation, prosecutors seem to have adhered to protocol.
"This Bolton prosecution and ultimately the indictment seemed to have observed the standard process including the regulations and norms within the Department of Justice," he said.
Unlike Comey's short, two-page indictment, Bolton's was a more "conventional" filing that "clearly sets forth the details involving the circumstances and circumstances in this instance," Mr Lesko said.
"It appears reasonably aligned with a series of cases... where government officials improperly handled and shared classified material."
