Federal Court Tosses Charges Against Two Former FBI Officials, Accuses Trump Justice Department of Political Prosecution Ahead of Midterms

A federal judge on Monday dismissed criminal charges against two former senior FBI officials accused of lying to Congress about the bureau’s handling of investigations involving Hunter Biden, delivering a blistering rebuke of the Justice Department and accusing the Trump administration of rushing a politically motivated prosecution just ahead of Tuesday’s midterm elections.

U.S. Magistrate Judge Zia M. Faruqui, presiding in federal court in Washington, D.C., threw out the case against Nikki Cole Floris and Bradley Benavides after determining that prosecutors had failed to establish sufficient evidence that either former official knowingly made false statements to congressional investigators. The ruling followed a series of contentious hearings during which the judge repeatedly questioned the government’s handling of the investigation and its unusual charging procedures.

“What has transpired here cannot be described as anything other than weaponization,” Faruqui declared from the bench, sharply criticizing the Justice Department’s decision to pursue the case in the final weeks before a closely contested national election.

The judge described the prosecution as a “rush job” and pointed to evidence indicating that the investigation had been initiated at the direction of senior administration officials, including FBI Director Kash Patel, following public statements by President Trump concerning alleged misconduct by federal intelligence agencies.

Floris and Benavides previously held senior positions in the FBI’s counterintelligence division, where they helped oversee the bureau’s Foreign Influence Task Force. The unit was responsible for investigating foreign attempts to interfere in American elections, including efforts involving disinformation and intelligence operations.

The criminal allegations stemmed from separate interviews the two officials gave to the House Judiciary Committee in 2023 concerning their knowledge of FBI investigations involving Hunter Biden and material recovered from his laptop before the 2020 presidential election.

Prosecutors maintained that both officials had deliberately minimized their awareness of the bureau’s investigative activities, particularly an internal operation known as Round River, which examined informant reporting concerning Hunter Biden and whether certain information could have originated from Russian disinformation efforts.

According to the government, statements made by Floris and Benavides during their congressional interviews were contradicted by internal FBI records and accounts from other witnesses. Prosecutors argued that the discrepancies demonstrated an effort to conceal the task force’s involvement in politically sensitive investigations.

Faruqui rejected the government’s contention that the evidence established probable cause to proceed. After examining the alleged false statements individually, the judge concluded that some were not demonstrably false, while others could reasonably have resulted from faulty recollection rather than intentional deception.

The judge also expressed concern about the circumstances under which the investigation began. During an earlier hearing, FBI agent Bryan Witt testified that Patel had assigned the matter to the bureau’s Kansas City field office following a July address by Trump in which the president called for renewed scrutiny of allegations that intelligence agencies had suppressed information concerning Chinese interference in the 2020 election.

Witt acknowledged under questioning that the assignment was unusual and that he had worried the investigation would be perceived as politically motivated. The inquiry subsequently shifted toward the congressional testimony of Floris and Benavides concerning Hunter Biden.

The prosecution encountered additional difficulties last week when Justice Department attorneys attempted to file an amended criminal complaint adding an obstruction charge without first obtaining the required judicial approval.

Faruqui reacted angrily to the filing, which appeared on the court’s public docket after midnight without a judge’s signature or sworn authorization. He said the procedure departed from established practice and raised serious questions about the government’s conduct.

The court struck the amended complaint from the record, leaving prosecutors to defend their original allegations at a preliminary hearing. Monday’s ruling dismissed those remaining charges as well.