John Bolton, a former Trump adviser, pleads guilty to one count of illegally withholding classified information
Listen to this article
Average 5 minutes
The audio version of this article was created by AI-based technology. It can be mispronounced. We are working with our partners to continuously review and improve the results.
John Bolton, the national security adviser during Donald Trump’s first presidential administration, pleaded guilty Friday to illegally withholding classified information, striking a deal with federal prosecutors.
Bolton pleaded guilty to one count of illegally retaining classified information. His plea deal with the Justice Department could help him avoid prison time, but a judge will ultimately decide his punishment. He will be sentenced on October 28 by US District Judge Theodore Chuang in Greenbelt, Md.
The plea agreement recommends that any prison sentence be five years but the judge is not bound by that part of the deal. Bolton can withdraw his guilty plea if a judge imposes a longer prison sentence or a fine of more than $2.25 million.
Bolton was indicted last October on 18 counts of keeping or disseminating classified information, including diary-like notes he shared with relatives while writing a memoir about his government career.
After leaving Trump’s first administration, Bolton has often criticized the president’s foreign policy decisions. He is a frequent commentator on broadcast news channels, including the CBC News Network.
The president has criticized Bolton since their professional split, calling him on various occasions a “washed-up man” and a fanatic who could lead the country into “World War Six.”
Bolton’s impeachment was sometimes framed as the case of another Trump adversary facing criminal charges. While some of those charges have fallen under court scrutiny and amid allegations of political retaliation, Bolton did not defend himself strongly against his charges before terminating the deal, and the investigation appears to have continued throughout the president’s last two terms.
It’s a stormy season under Trump
Bolton must pay part of the fine within five days of his plea and the balance within 90 days. He agreed to forfeit his retirement pay to work for the government. The plea agreement also requires him to submit to interviews with federal intelligence officials and perform up to 100 hours of community service.
After the prosecutor read aloud a summary of his charges, Bolton admitted they were accurate and told the judge, “I’m sorry about that.”
Defense attorney Abbe Lowell said Bolton “did what true leaders do” by pleading guilty.
“He took responsibility for the mistake he made, thereby saving government resources to pursue a case that could reveal more sensitive information,” Lowell said in a statement after the hearing.
Two blocks from the White House32:48How far will the US Supreme Court allow Trump to go?
The US Supreme Court will deliver rulings in more than a dozen major cases in the coming days. And with birthright citizenship decisions, transgender athletes and the Federal Reserve on the docket, much is at stake as the US president’s agenda is tested by the justice system. This week, Washington reporters Katie Simpson, Willy Lowry and Paul Hunter ask: How far will the Supreme Court allow Donald Trump to go?
Bolton faced a lawsuit and a Justice Department investigation after he left a position related to information in a 2020 book he published, The Room Where It Happenedthat exposed Trump as someone who has no knowledge of foreign policy.
The Trump administration has argued that Bolton’s manuscript includes classified information that could harm national security if disclosed.
The current investigation first became public in August 2025, when the FBI searched his home in Maryland and office in Washington, DC.
Bolton served in three previous Republican presidential administrations from Ronald Reagan’s office when he was appointed by Trump in 2018 to be the third national security adviser. But his short tenure has been marked by conflicts with the president over North Korea, Iran and Ukraine.
A few battles over classified documents
The handling of classified information has been a major issue in American politics for the past decade, starting with the investigation into former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s handling of emails at her New York residence, which did not result in charges but appeared to have a negative impact on her 2016 presidential campaign.
Former president Joe Biden faced scrutiny of his own after classified documents were found in the front office in Washington and at his home in Wilmington, Del. The special counsel’s investigation did not lead to convictions, but prosecutors’ disclosure of Biden’s conversation about the matter added to the impression that the Democrat was struggling with cognitive issues.
The former American president Donald Trump says there is no difference between having secret documents and that of the current President Joe Biden. Andrew Chang breaks down what Trump is right about — and what he’s not.
In 2023, the FBI executed a search warrant at Trump’s Mar-a-Lago estate in Florida, which led to numerous charges including charges under the Espionage Act. Documents were found in various locations throughout the area, officials said, including those labeled as top-secret, top-secret.
Trump’s dramatic political comeback in 2024, which culminated in a presidential election victory, stopped the prosecution in its tracks based on the US legal tradition that a sitting president cannot be impeached. The special counsel’s report on the investigation was sealed in the federal judge’s decision.
Democrats have reacted with alarm in recent weeks to an opinion issued this spring by the Office of Legal Counsel within the Justice Department, which said a federal law requiring the president to turn over certain documents to the National Archives is unconstitutional. Democrats say the law could provide conditions for Trump after his current presidency to keep sensitive information and not face any consequences.
As a general matter, some analysts and former government officials have argued that the government’s process of information is ineffective and confusing, as many documents receive a classified rating due to more caution than the actual content of their information.
