Department of Justice Special Prosecutor Jack Smith is up to his special duties again, having filed a new superseding indictment against former President Donald Trump.

This despite a judge throwing out his last case, siding with the Trump attorneys, who said the prosecution was outside of the DOJ legal authority.

Previously, the Smith indictment was 45 pages, but the more recently re-filed charges uses the same font and spans 36 pages.

The updated indictment removes a few things, including references to Trump's presidential acts and references to former US Assistant Attorney General Jeffrey Clark.

Noted Change

This was pointed out by Real Clear Investigations author Julie Kelly, who pointed out that Clark was removed as a co-conspirator.

She cited the Supreme Court decision, which ruled that interactions with his Department of Justices fell under "official acts" and were protected by presidential immunity.

The highly contentious Supreme Court ruling caused ripples across the political pundits and lawmakers who appeared to be waiting for the Trump demise.

It appears Smith removed @JeffClarkUS as a co conspirator.

SCOTUS determined Trump’s interactions with his own DOJ clearly represented “official acts” and protected by presidential immunity

Where does Jeff Clark go to get his reputation back? pic.twitter.com/SiZ0acmeEg

— Julie Kelly 🇺🇸 (@julie_kelly2) August 27, 2024

The reporter asked pointedly about the recovery from his inclusion in the document, saying "Where does Jeff Clark go to get his reputation back?"

From Clark

Clark weighed in himself, saying "Thank you, Julie! Exactly," before going on to explain his role in the Trump interactions:

I was the only DOJ, White House Counsel’s Office, or other White House lawyer or official I know of other than Peter Navarro (I’d include Steve Bannon, whom executive privilege covered but he was not in government at the time), who refused to reveal the President’s or DOJ’s confidences to the January 6 Committee, the D.C. Bar, or any other lawfare operation.

The former assistant attorney general said, "I told them all repeatedly that you are all seeking to pierce more privileges than you can count.

"That is unlawful and I won’t help you destroy the Executive Branch or destroy Donald Trump, an honorable President that you harbor an irrational hatred for that I do not understand. And the Trump v U.S. immunity decision vindicates my position."

From the New Doc

Trump is charged with the same federal counts of conspiracy and obstruction in both the previous and new indictments, according to Business Insider's analysis. However, the new indictment charges Trump the 2024 presidential candidate, not the former president.

"It certainly was the only move he had," Bachner, now of Bachner & Associates in Manhattan, said of Smith.

"The first indictment was never going to pass Constitutional muster," he said. "So if Smith wants to proceed against Trump his only choice was to have a new indictment voted that eliminated the issues raised by the Supreme Court on immunity."