The Justice Department’s pending decision on whether to indict former National Security Advisor John Bolton has reached a critical juncture. Multiple sources familiar with the investigation confirm that senior DOJ officials will convene this weekend to determine whether criminal charges will be filed over Bolton’s controversial 2020 memoir, “The Room Where It Happened.”
Three career prosecutors assigned to the case have recommended proceeding with charges, according to a source who requested anonymity due to the sensitive nature of ongoing deliberations. These recommendations stem from allegations that Bolton disclosed classified information without proper authorization, potentially violating security protocols established under Executive Order 13526.
“The evidentiary threshold for prosecution has been met,” said former federal prosecutor Renee Sanders, who specialized in national security cases during her tenure at the Justice Department. “The question now isn’t about evidence but whether prosecution serves the broader public interest.”
The investigation began in 2020 after the Trump administration failed to block the book’s publication through court action. Then-Attorney General William Barr directed prosecutors to explore criminal charges after President Trump publicly called for Bolton’s prosecution. The case has continued under the current administration, raising eyebrows among legal observers who question its political implications.
Bolton’s attorney, Charles Cooper, declined specific comment when reached yesterday but reiterated his client’s long-standing position: “Ambassador Bolton followed all applicable procedures and at no time knowingly disclosed classified information.” Cooper previously told reporters that Bolton had worked extensively with National Security Council reviewers before publication.
The White House has maintained deliberate distance from the case. Press Secretary Jen Murphy stated last month that “the President believes Justice Department decisions about criminal cases must be made independently and without political interference of any kind.” This position stands in stark contrast to the previous administration’s approach.
Congressional reaction has followed predictable partisan lines. Rep. Thomas Hartwell (R-WY), ranking member on the House Intelligence Committee, told me during a Capitol Hill interview that “Bolton betrayed the president’s trust and endangered national security for profit.” Meanwhile, Senator Claire Michaels (D-MA) characterized the investigation as “the lingering aftermath of a vindictive administration’s attempt to silence critics.”
The legal standards in national security disclosure cases are notoriously complex. According to data from the Congressional Research Service, only 13 individuals have been prosecuted under the Espionage Act for unauthorized disclosures to the press since 2009, reflecting the high bar for such cases.
Conviction could potentially carry significant penalties. Similar cases have resulted in sentences ranging from probation to prison terms exceeding three years, though first-time offenders typically receive more lenient treatment. Financial penalties could also be substantial – Bolton reportedly received a $2 million advance for his memoir.
The book, which painted an unflattering portrait of President Trump’s foreign policy decision-making, became an immediate bestseller despite the administration’s attempts to prevent its release. It sold over 780,000 copies in its first week alone.
Bolton’s decades-long government service complicates matters. Having served in multiple administrations dating back to Reagan, he has extensive experience with classified information protocols. “Bolton isn’t some junior staffer who might plausibly claim ignorance of proper procedures,” noted national security expert Dr. Rebecca Waterman of Georgetown University.
I’ve covered Washington’s handling of classified information cases for over fifteen years, and this one stands out for its political overtones. The timing – coming years after publication – suggests careful deliberation rather than rushed judgment, but doesn’t eliminate concerns about political influence.
Sources within the DOJ indicate Attorney General Merrick Garland will personally review the recommendations before authorizing any charges, underscoring the case’s significance. The department faces a challenging balancing act between enforcing security protocols and avoiding the appearance of political prosecution.
Whatever decision emerges from this weekend’s meetings will likely intensify debates about government transparency, executive privilege, and the fine line between politics and national security. For Bolton, who has remained publicly defiant throughout the investigation, the stakes couldn’t be higher.
The DOJ and NSC both declined official comment when contacted for this story, citing policies against discussing potential or ongoing investigations.
