Federal prosecutors could soon bring criminal charges against former national security adviser John Bolton, marking a dramatic escalation in a yearslong investigation into one of President Donald Trump’s most outspoken Republican critics.
Bolton, who served as Trump’s national security adviser until 2019, had his Maryland home and Washington, D.C. office searched by law enforcement in August as part of a national security investigation led by the U.S. attorney’s office. The investigation traces back to the final months of Trump’s first term and continued under the Biden administration, a key detail that could weaken claims of political bias amid Democrats critical of recent indictments targeting Trump adversaries.
Prosecutors met last weekend to finalize an indictment that could be filed within days, CNN reported on Saturday. Now, legal experts say they are even more convinced that an indictment is all but guaranteed for the former national security adviser.
“I’d be more surprised if he weren’t indicted at this point,” former federal prosecutor Neama Rahmani told the Washington Examiner.
A national security case years in the making
During the first Trump administration, the Justice Department started a criminal investigation into Bolton after the publication of his 2020 memoir, The Room Where It Happened. The administration sued to block its publication, but U.S. District Judge Royce Lamberth ultimately rejected the effort despite finding that Bolton had likely shared classified information.
During the same year, a federal grand jury issued subpoenas as part of the criminal investigation into Bolton. The investigation continued but ultimately stalled during the Biden years, although it became more active after Trump began his second term earlier this year.
The basis for the recent raid involved information gathered overseas by the CIA that pointed to the possible mishandling of national security information, the New York Times reported.
That intelligence was passed to the FBI, which quietly opened a criminal investigation and obtained approvals from judges to raid Bolton’s home and his Washington, D.C. office. Last month, a federal judge unsealed a heavily redacted FBI affidavit supporting the search of Bolton’s home. One redacted section titled “Hack of Bolton’s AOL Account by Foreign Entity” reportedly details how U.S. intelligence discovered Bolton’s emails during surveillance of a foreign government, a finding that, according to MSNBC sources familiar with the matter, helped spur the Biden-era investigation into his handling of classified material.
Notably, the Times reported that a source said the investigation was not focused on material Bolton gathered while writing his memoir, indicating that the case has expanded beyond where it began during the first Trump administration.
Since the raid, unredacted court filings have shown that agents recovered multiple documents labeled “secret,” “confidential,” and “classified,” including materials related to weapons of mass destruction, U.S. military operations, and allied air strikes. Investigators also seized computers, USB drives, and other electronic devices from both locations.
Legal analysts say the case may have ‘more legitimacy’
CNN legal analyst and former federal prosecutor Elie Honig told CNN News Central Tuesday that there are “indicators” suggesting the Bolton case could carry more legal weight, in his view, than recent prosecutions of former FBI Director James Comey and Democratic New York Attorney General Letitia James.
“The reporting is that this case against John Bolton originated during the prior administration, the Biden administration,” Honig said. “There are also indicators that this case developed organically — that it was based on a leak of information from John Bolton to some foreign entities, which then came to the attention of American intelligence.”
Honig added that the dual judicial approvals for the August searches were significant. “Two separate federal judges, one in Maryland, one in D.C., both reviewed and approved search warrants. Both found at least probable cause to engage in those searches,” he said.
If prosecutors bring charges, Honig said the key legal questions will mirror those in other classified-document cases, such as whether the material was intentionally mishandled and whether the information was ultimately disseminated to outsiders. If the answer to both is yes, “then it’s much more likely we will actually see a criminal indictment of John Bolton,” he said.
Rahmani told the Washington Examiner that the nature of classified records prosecutions explains why the Bolton case has moved more slowly than the recent Comey or James indictments.
“Any case involving classified information requires the government to jump through the Classified Information Procedures Act. It’s cumbersome and time-consuming — you have to secure clearances, handle evidence in SCIFs, redact documents, and make sure jurors see only what they’re cleared to see. It’s a logistical nightmare,” he said.
Rahmani said prosecutors must also consider “graymail,” a defense tactic in which defendants threaten to expose national security information during trial. “That’s always a risk in these cases,” he said. “The defense can try to leverage classified evidence to harm U.S. interests or pressure prosecutors to back down. DOJ has to ask itself, ‘What’s the endgame? Is it worth it?’”
The challenge, Rahmani noted, is balancing that caution against Trump’s political appetite for results. “For the president, it really is worth it — he doesn’t like Bolton at all,” he said. “But for DOJ prosecutors, it’s a different question.”
Differences from other recent indictments
While Bolton has long been one of Trump’s most visible detractors, as well as a frequent cable-news commentator, Rahmani said that means a possible selective-prosecution claim could actually be stronger than similar claims from Comey or James if charges are filed.
“Bolton may have the best selective-prosecution argument because he’s such a high-profile critic and was in Trump’s inner circle,” Rahmani said. “But it’s not vindictive prosecution — he’s not being punished for something like leading impeachment or Russiagate. Selective or vindictive-prosecution claims are both very difficult to win, but Bolton’s selective argument is at least a little stronger.”
Rahmani also said the choice of venue, the U.S. attorney’s office in Maryland, gives the case more institutional grounding than the politically fraught Eastern District of Virginia, where several prosecutors have resigned since Trump replaced former U.S. Attorney Erik Siebert with Lindsey Halligan, a former personal attorney to the president.
“Maryland’s office has experienced leadership,” he said. “You’re not going to get the same criticism we’ve seen elsewhere.”
Bolton defense and political backdrop
Bolton’s attorney, Abbe Lowell, who also represents Letitia James, has maintained that his client handled materials properly.
“An objective and thorough review will show nothing inappropriate was stored or kept by Amb. Bolton,” Lowell previously said after the August searches.
CLASSIFIED DOCUMENTS FOUND DURING SEARCH OF BOLTON’S OFFICE: FBI
Since the release of Bolton’s book, Trump has publicly accused Bolton of leaking classified material, calling Bolton a “lowlife” and “dumb as a rock.” The president revoked Bolton’s Secret Service detail earlier this year, even as Iranian operatives remained under an indictment for plotting to assassinate him.
If charges move forward, Bolton’s case would mark the first national-security prosecution of a former Trump official under the president’s second term.
