The Legal Blunders in Jack Smith’s Indictment: Julie Kelly Weighs In

In a recent interview with Monica Crowley, Julie Kelly, a prominent journalist and host of Declassified with Julie Kelly, provided a detailed analysis of the latest superseding indictment against former President Donald Trump by Special Counsel Jack Smith. Kelly’s insights highlight the complex legal and political maneuvers at play, as well as the challenges Smith faces in sustaining the charges.

Kelly begins by summarizing the backdrop of the case. “It was a year ago, August 2023, when Jack Smith brought his first January 6th indictment against the former president,” she explains. “Four counts: three conspiracy, one obstruction—a very weak indictment to begin with, relying on vague statutes.” Kelly emphasizes that the initial indictment suffered a significant blow when three of the four counts were reversed by the Supreme Court in December 2023. This legal setback forced Smith to reconsider and revise his approach.

One of the most critical developments in this case, according to Kelly, was the Supreme Court’s ruling on July 1st, 2024. “We got the ruling we were all waiting for,” she notes, referring to the decision that affirmed presidential immunity for certain official acts, even those beyond a president’s constitutional authority. This ruling, Kelly asserts, “gutted” key portions of Smith’s original indictment. “Jack Smith had to remove everything related to Donald Trump’s interactions with his own Department of Justice,” she says, underscoring how the Supreme Court’s decision reshaped the indictment.

Kelly also draws attention to the changes made in the new indictment, noting that it is nine pages shorter than the original. However, she questions the substance of these revisions. “Smith had to remove Jeffrey Clark as a co-conspirator,” she explains, because Clark, as a DOJ official at the time, was also covered under the immunity blanket. Yet, despite these omissions, Kelly suggests that Smith’s strategy remains fundamentally flawed.

The conversation then shifts to the broader implications of the case. Kelly believes that Smith’s attempt to portray Trump as acting in personal or political pursuit during the post-election period is unlikely to convince the courts. “Will it, of course, convince Judge Chutkan of that? Will he eventually, if this gets to the Supreme Court, convince them of that? No,” she asserts confidently.

As the interview continues, Kelly highlights another critical issue with Smith’s indictment: his failure to address the Supreme Court’s decision in Fisher. “The court said you have to prove that the individual charged either tampered with or destroyed evidence or documents,” she explains, a standard that Smith’s indictment does not meet. This oversight, in Kelly’s view, represents a significant vulnerability in the prosecution’s case.

Kelly also touches on the political motivations behind Smith’s actions, suggesting that the timing of the indictment is no coincidence. “This is all about optics—injecting January 6th back into the headlines as people are preparing to vote before the election,” she contends. By doing so, Kelly believes that Smith is attempting to “sustain the destruction lie that we all now know is not true.”

However, Kelly argues that Smith’s focus on short-term political gains could backfire in the long run. “The bigger issue, the legal one, is going to be a huge problem for him,” she predicts, pointing to the Supreme Court’s potential to dismantle the indictment further.

Reflecting on the broader context, Kelly emphasizes the relentless nature of the legal battles Trump faces. “This is what they want to do—to distract Donald Trump, drain his resources, and damage him as much as possible before the Iowa caucuses and as we get closer to next November,” she says. Despite these efforts, Kelly remains optimistic that the public is becoming increasingly aware of the “hoax” and “trickery” behind these legal maneuvers.

In conclusion, Julie Kelly’s analysis offers a critical perspective on the ongoing legal and political battles surrounding former President Trump. She highlights the weaknesses in Jack Smith’s latest indictment, suggesting that it may not withstand legal scrutiny in the long term. As the case continues to unfold, Kelly’s insights provide a valuable lens through which to understand the complex dynamics at play.

Video: