The indictment of John Bolton on charges of sharing classified information is stronger than the recent charges against two other political foes of President Donald Trump, but the former U.S. national security adviser has several options for mounting a defense, legal experts said.
Bolton, 76, said in a statement on Thursday that he was the latest target in Trump’s weaponization of the Justice Department against his enemies. He pleaded not guilty on Friday to 18 counts of transmitting and retaining national defense information.
Trump, a Republican who campaigned for the presidency on a vow of retribution after facing multiple legal woes following his first term in the White House that ended in 2021, has dispensed with decades-long norms designed to insulate federal law enforcement from political pressures.
The recent indictments of former FBI Director James Comey and New York Attorney General Letitia James, both of whom investigated Trump, have alarmed some Trump critics who say his use of the criminal justice system to punish enemies resembles the tactics of authoritarian leaders.
But there are key differences between Bolton’s indictment and those against Comey and James.
The investigation of Bolton, who served as Trump’s national security adviser in 2018 and 2019 but has since become an outspoken Trump critic, began in 2022, predating the current Trump administration.
The charges were brought by experienced prosecutors in the Maryland U.S. Attorney’s office and the Justice Department. Both Comey and James were charged by Lindsey Halligan, a newly-installed U.S. Attorney in Virginia after Trump forced out her predecessor over his reluctance to pursue the cases.
The 26-page indictment of Bolton also includes far more detail than the other cases.
“This indictment is significantly more fulsome than those exceedingly bare-bones indictments,” said Benjamin Klubes, a Washington-based defense lawyer and former prosecutor.
Bolton’s lawyer, Abbe Lowell, did not immediately respond to a request for comment. A Justice Department spokesperson declined to comment.
SELECTIVE OR VINDICTIVE PROSECUTION
Like Comey and James, Bolton could seek to have the indictment dismissed on the basis of selective prosecution, meaning he was charged over conduct that other similarly situated people are usually not charged over, or vindictive prosecution, suggesting he was charged in retaliation for exercising his legal rights.
Comey has pleaded not guilty to charges of lying to Congress. James is expected to appear in court on mortgage fraud charges later this month and has denied wrongdoing.
To claim selective prosecution, Bolton could argue that no Trump administration officials faced charges over an incident earlier this year in which U.S. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth shared details of an imminent attack in a Signal message group that included his wife, brother, personal lawyer, and a journalist from the Atlantic magazine.
Trump administration officials denied that any classified information was shared.
To argue vindictive prosecution, Bolton could point to numerous statements Trump made in interviews and on social media alleging Bolton broke the law and should go to jail. He could argue those statements showed Trump’s desire for retaliation over Bolton’s public criticisms of him, which are protected speech under the U.S. Constitution.
Such motions face a high bar, however, and judges may be less inclined to grant them if the evidence appears strong, said Steven Cash, a former prosecutor who is now executive director of The Steady State, a pro-democracy advocacy coalition of former national security professionals.
Comey also plans to argue that his indictment must be dismissed because Halligan was not properly appointed, an argument that would not be available to Bolton because his case is in Maryland.
