Unlike Comey and James, John Bolton faces eighteen counts involving classified national-security material/ Image: X
For the third time in as many weeks, President Donald Trump’s Justice Department has brought charges against one of his most prominent adversaries. This time, the target is John Bolton, Trump’s former national security adviser turned outspoken critic, who surrendered to federal authorities on October 17, 2025, following his indictment on eighteen counts of retaining and transmitting classified information, according to Reuters. During his court appearance, Bolton pleaded not guilty to all charges. The case, while echoing the recent prosecutions of James Comey and New York Attorney General Letitia James, stands apart in both severity and national-security consequence. Bolton’s indictment completes a remarkable trilogy in which three of Trump’s known critics have faced federal charges within a single month. Yet, even as many observers see a pattern of political retribution, the allegations against Bolton reach deeper, intersecting questions of state secrecy, personal conduct, and the limits of presidential power over the instruments of justice.
The allegations
According to the Justice Department, a federal grand jury in Maryland charged John Bolton with eighteen counts of transmitting and retaining classified information dating back to his tenure in Trump’s first administration. The 26-page indictment, reported by AFP, alleges that Bolton sent “top secret documents” to two unauthorised individuals. believed to be his wife and daughter — using a non-government email and messaging app. The materials, described as “diary-like entries” about his work as national security adviser, total more than 1,000 pages. The documents, prosecutors contend, contained “intelligence about future attacks, foreign adversaries, and foreign-policy relations.” Attorney General Pam Bondi said in a statement, “Anyone who abuses a position of power and jeopardises our national security will be held accountable. No one is above the law.” Each of the eighteen counts carries a potential sentence of up to ten years in prison. Bolton, 76, who served as the 26th national security adviser from April 2018 to September 2019 and earlier as US ambassador to the United Nations under George W. Bush, denied all wrongdoing. In a statement released Thursday night and reported by CNN, he said, “Now, I have become the latest target in weaponising the Justice Department to charge those [Trump] deems to be his enemies with charges that were declined before or distort the facts.” His attorney, Abbe Lowell, also rejected the government’s claims, telling reporters that the records in question were “known to the FBI as far back as 2021.”
A familiar foe, and a deeper threat
Bolton’s relationship with Donald Trump was fraught long before his indictment. As early as 2020, Trump had publicly accused him of “breaking the law” and warned there would be “a really big price to pay.” At one campaign event, Trump said of Bolton, “Now he will have bombs dropped on him!” According to CNN, the Justice Department alleges that sometime after Bolton left the White House in 2019, a cyber actor believed to be associated with Iran hacked into Bolton’s personal email and gained unauthorised access to classified information. The indictment says Bolton reported the breach but did not inform the government that national defence materials may have been compromised. Legal analysts suggest this detail makes the case more significant than those of Comey or James. CNN’s senior legal analyst Elie Honig said that if prosecutors can prove Bolton’s mishandling of classified data exposed intelligence to foreign actors, “it will show Bolton’s case to be far more serious than the series of prominent politicians facing similar problems in recent years — including Hillary Clinton and Trump himself.” Bolton, in a written statement quoted by BBC and other outlets, said he had “devoted [his] life to America’s foreign policy and national security and would never compromise those goals.” He added that he resigned from Trump’s administration when “it became impossible for [him] to continue.” He also linked the indictment to his 2020 memoir The Room Where It Happened, which was sharply critical of Trump. “The retribution against me began then,” he said, “continued when he tried unsuccessfully to block the publication of my book before the 2020 election, and became one of his rallying cries in his re-election campaign.”
The pattern: Comey, James, and the president’s critics
Bolton’s prosecution follows the indictment of two other prominent Trump critics within the past fortnight. Former FBI Director James Comey was charged on 8 October 2025 with making false statements to Congress and obstructing a congressional proceeding, according to NBC News. The charges relate to testimony he gave to the Senate Judiciary Committee in September 2020 concerning his handling of the Hillary Clinton email investigation and the FBI’s internal inquiry into pro-Trump election interference by Russia.Prosecutors allege that Comey misled senators when he said he had not authorised leaks to the media about FBI investigations. Comey maintains he is innocent and pleaded not guilty at his first court appearance in Alexandria, Virginia, asserting that the charges are politically motivated. His indictment, filed just days after President Trump publicly urged Attorney General Pam Bondi to prosecute him, is seen by critics as part of a broader effort to target the president’s critics within federal law enforcement.The next day, 9 October 2025, New York Attorney General Letitia James — who successfully prosecuted Trump for civil financial fraud in February 2024 — was indicted by a Virginia grand jury on charges of bank fraud and making false statements regarding a property she purchased in Norfolk, Virginia, in 2020, as reported by Reuters. Prosecutors allege that James misrepresented the property as her secondary residence on her mortgage application to obtain favourable loan terms, when she instead rented it out to family members, saving approximately $18,933 because second-home mortgage rates are lower than those for investment properties. The indictment also claims she misled OVM Financial and First Savings Bank about her plans for the property. A person familiar with the James property told CNN that members of her family are living at the home, that there is no rental agreement, James never relinquished control of the property, and she has made all mortgage payments. James faces up to 30 years in prison if convicted. She has denied wrongdoing and described the charges as politically motivated, with her attorneys stating the case is “driven by President Trump’s desire for revenge,” according to CNN. Trump has also publicly suggested that she should “face the same severity” of justice as he believes should apply to others who have challenged him.Taken together, the three indictments have underscored what critics see as a campaign of legal retaliation by Trump’s administration against his adversaries. Trump, however, has repeatedly defended the prosecutions. He called Bolton “a bad guy,” James “guilty as hell,” and Comey “one of the worst human beings this Country has ever been exposed to,” adding in each case, “That’s the way it goes.” Bolton’s name, notably, also appeared on a 2023 “deep state” list published by Kash Patel — Trump’s current FBI Director — in his book. Critics have called the list an “enemies list.” Two individuals on that list, Bolton and Comey, have now been indicted.
Distinctions and the common thread
While the indictments of James Comey and Letitia James have drawn attention as politically charged actions against Trump critics, Bolton’s case differs in depth and consequence. Unlike Comey’s alleged false statements to Congress or James’s mortgage-related charges, Bolton faces multiple counts involving highly classified materials whose mishandling could directly threaten national security. The Justice Department emphasises that these documents contained intelligence on potential attacks and foreign adversaries, a risk far exceeding the procedural or financial nature of the other cases. All three cases, however, share a common thread: President Trump publicly singled out each individual as a target, applied pressure on the Justice Department, and elevated the proceedings into the public sphere. Bolton’s indictment, though, carries heavier legal and strategic stakes, marking a rare intersection of political retribution and tangible national security implications.
Power, public spectacle, and the Justice Department’s new face
The visible conduct of law enforcement has drawn intense scrutiny. The Washington Post and CNN both reported that FBI agents searched Bolton’s Maryland home in August, a raid that coincided with public statements from senior officials. Around the same time the search began, Patel posted on X (formerly Twitter): “NO ONE is above the law… @FBI agents on mission.” FBI Deputy Director Dan Bongino followed thirteen minutes later with, “Public corruption will not be tolerated.” Attorney General Pam Bondi added soon after, “America’s safety isn’t negotiable. Justice will be pursued. Always.” The coordination and timing of these posts drew immediate comparison to the more restrained approach of 2022, when the FBI searched Trump’s Mar-a-Lago residence for classified documents. At that time, officials offered minimal public comment, citing protocol and ethical constraints. Legal experts note that the Justice Department’s current pattern — publicising searches and charges in real time — departs from that norm. As CNN observed, “Over and over again, the administration has not just probed Trump critics, but it’s made a show of it, often in ways that run afoul of legal ethics.” Prosecutors are expected to speak through legal filings and “keep their public comments to a minimum.” Instead, the Justice Department under Trump has treated these actions as open demonstrations of accountability, or, as some critics contend, of power. The former national security adviser’s ordeal, then, sits at the crossroads of justice and politics. Whether Bolton’s case proves legitimate or partisan, the White House’s readiness to direct attention toward its perceived foes, and to publicise their downfall, marks a striking shift in the balance between law enforcement and presidential influence.
The stakes
Of all the indictments, Bolton’s carries the gravest implications. His alleged mishandling of classified material, if proven, would not merely constitute a technical violation but a potential breach of national security. Yet, the political shadow hanging over the case ensures it will be read as more than a question of law. For President Trump, the indictment reinforces his message that “no one is above the law.” For his critics, it is a troubling sign of institutional capture. As Bolton himself said, “Now, I have become the latest target in weaponising the Justice Department to charge those [Trump] deems to be his enemies.” Three weeks, three indictments, three of Trump’s most persistent adversaries, and one enduring question: when justice becomes indistinguishable from politics, where does accountability end and retribution begin? Go to Source
