ethan.brook News Editor
A federal judge on Monday dismissed a criminal complaint against two former senior FBI counterintelligence officials who were accused of making false statements to lawmakers regarding their roles in the bureau’s investigation into Hunter Biden. U.S. Magistrate Judge Zia Faruqui ruled that prosecutors failed to demonstrate probable cause that Nikki Floris and Bradley Benavides knowingly made false statements during their 2023 testimony before the House Judiciary Committee.
A Scathing Ruling on Timing and Intent
During an hour-long oral ruling in Washington, Faruqui rebuked the Justice Department and the FBI, stating that the prosecution lacked motive and direct evidence. The judge criticized the government for rushing the case and suggested the timing was politically motivated, noting the complaint was brought just 10 days before the midterm elections.
pic.twitter.com/bg6Vqm6DX4
What has transpired here cannot be described as anything other than weaponization,
Faruqui said during the court hearing, adding that he refused to bury his head in the sand regarding the calendar.
The magistrate judge pointed out that certain statements by the former officials were not actually false, while others amounted to honest memory mistakes. He also struck an unsigned and unsworn superseding complaint from the record, which prosecutors had filed after midnight on the eve of the hearing to add obstruction of Congress charges without proper judicial review.
Origins of the Case and Testimony
The charges stemmed from Floris and Benavides’ congressional testimony in 2023 regarding the FBI task force known as the Foreign Influence Task Force and an operation named “Round River.” The task force had previously examined potential foreign influence and raised concerns ahead of the 2020 presidential election that Russia might engage in disinformation operations regarding a laptop belonging to Hunter Biden, whose computer data later led to successful criminal charges against him.
Testimony during the preliminary proceedings revealed that the inquiry into Floris and Benavides began following a primetime address on election security delivered by President Donald Trump, during which the president directed the FBI to investigate individuals he believed had undermined his efforts regarding the 2020 election results. FBI Director Kash Patel subsequently tasked the Kansas City field office with scrutinizing Floris, who had previously cast doubt on an intelligence report concerning China. An FBI case agent testified that he held concerns the investigation would be viewed as political.
Legal Fallout and Reactions
Following the dismissal, Floris and Benavides embraced outside the courtroom, supported by former senior Justice Department and FBI officials, including former Acting FBI Director Brian Driscoll and Steve Jensen.
Margaret Donovan, an attorney for Floris, called the complaint a slapdash Hunter Biden conspiracy fever dream
and expressed hope that the courts remain a refuge for citizens targeted by the administration. Attorneys for Benavides praised the decision, labeling the accusations political theater and noting their relief that the judge weighed the inadequate evidence against the law.
In a statement, the Justice Department disagreed with the magistrate’s decision, arguing that it suggested high-ranking officials are immune from accountability for making materially false statements to Congress. The DOJ noted it is evaluating all options, though legal experts point out that while prosecutors could theoretically take the case to a grand jury to seek an indictment, such an outcome is considered unlikely given the judge’s strict probable cause findings.