Judge criticizes Justice Department's handling of ex-FBI officials' charges over Hunter Biden investigation
Skip to content
A federal magistrate judge criticized the Justice Department (DOJ) during a lengthy hearing on Tuesday for attempting to tack on new charges overnight in a case against two former FBI officials accused of lying to Congress about their knowledge regarding the federal investigation into Hunter Biden’s laptop ahead of the 2020 election.
“Why today on this one case have you changed the entire history of how you charge cases?” Judge Zia Faruqui asked DOJ lawyers, questioning whether the government was “afraid” of the probable cause inquiry.
“We are not afraid of a probable cause finding,” Assistant U.S. Attorney John Borchert responded.
Nikki Floris and Bradley Benavides each face one count of making false statements in connection with interviews given to the House Judiciary Committee in 2023.
The Justice Department sought to add obstruction charges in a superseding complaint filed just after midnight, a procedural maneuver Faruqui remarked was “inappropriate” and outside of the norm.
“It is not our court’s practice, and I think it’s appropriately not our practice that unsigned complaints are filed on the docket,” Faruqui said shortly into the hearing. “I think they should’ve filed nothing.”
Attorneys for Floris and Benavides argued that the DOJ’s actions raised concerns about the “accuracy and credibility” of the case against whom they described as “decorated” law enforcement veterans.
“The evidence is mounting that this prosecution is about some political football and not the law or the facts in this case,” said Mary Dorhmann, one of Floris’s lawyers.
Faruqui, expressing frustration, later said that he would not “bless” the superseding complaint and ordered that it be struck from the record.
Floris and Benavides have not been indicted by a grand jury, so Faruqui is weighing whether there is enough probable cause to support the charges and move the case forward.
Prosecutors allege that Floris and Benavides, both of whom worked in the FBI’s Foreign Influence Task Force (FITF), lied about their knowledge and involvement in the bureau’s investigations into Hunter Biden.
The controversy erupted just weeks before the 2020 presidential election when the New York Post published stories based on the contents of a laptop that a Delaware repair shop owner said Hunter Biden had left there and never picked up. The FBI seized the laptop in 2019, but a copy of the hard drive was given to Trump’s personal attorney Rudy Guiliani, who passed it to the news outlet.
The contents included emails related to Hunter Biden’s foreign business dealings, including one that hinted at an alleged meeting between then-Vice President Joe Biden and an adviser to the Ukrainian gas company Burisma. The Biden campaign denied that a meeting ever occurred.
Federal investigators claim that the Floris and Benavides “knew about, and were actively involved in” the FBI’s investigations, citing documents and witness accounts that purportedly showed the two regularly discussed it within the FITF and with other FBI officials.
The government alleges that Floris and Benavides were not forthcoming about the FITF’s involvement when they spoke to lawmakers in 2023 about the FBI’s handling of the Biden investigations and that their “materially false” statements impeded the Judiciary Committee’s probe.
Ron Safer, an attorney representing Benavides, repeatedly pressed Special FBI Agent Bryan Witt to explain exactly how his client’s allegedly false statements affected the committee’s probe. Faruqui noted that materiality question was “at the heart” of the case.
“As an investigator, explain how Mr. Bonavides’s knowledge of whether or not there was a laptop that the FBI had in 2020 attributable to Hunter Biden, would have any impact on what the Judiciary Committee was investigating,” Safer said.
Witt admitted that he did not ask that question specifically to anyone on the committee.
The special agent also testified on Tuesday that he was concerned after being assigned to the case that it could be “viewed as political.” He said FBI Director Kash Patel directed the investigation into Floris and others the day after President Trump gave an Oval Office speech in July rehashing claims that the 2020 election was stolen.
The hearing is set to resume on Wednesday with additional testimony from Witt. A ruling from the judge is expected to follow.
Copyright 2026 Nexstar Media Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Read the full story at The Hill ↗
A federal magistrate judge criticized the Justice Department (DOJ) during a lengthy hearing on Tuesday for attempting to tack on new charges overnight in a case against two former…
This lens runs the verified story through Cinnamon's AI — wired in the next step.
Skip to content
A federal magistrate judge criticized the Justice Department (DOJ) during a lengthy hearing on Tuesday for attempting to tack on new charges overnight in a case against two former FBI officials accused of lying to Congress about their knowledge regarding the federal investigation into Hunter Biden’s laptop ahead of the 2020 election.
“Why today on this one case have you changed the entire history of how you charge cases?” Judge Zia Faruqui asked DOJ lawyers, questioning whether the government was “afraid” of the probable cause inquiry.
“We are not afraid of a probable cause finding,” Assistant U.S. Attorney John Borchert responded.
Nikki Floris and Bradley Benavides each face one count of making false statements in connection with interviews given to the House Judiciary Committee in 2023.
The Justice Department sought to add obstruction charges in a superseding complaint filed just after midnight, a procedural maneuver Faruqui remarked was “inappropriate” and outside of the norm.
“It is not our court’s practice, and I think it’s appropriately not our practice that unsigned complaints are filed on the docket,” Faruqui said shortly into the hearing. “I think they should’ve filed nothing.”
Attorneys for Floris and Benavides argued that the DOJ’s actions raised concerns about the “accuracy and credibility” of the case against whom they described as “decorated” law enforcement veterans.
“The evidence is mounting that this prosecution is about some political football and not the law or the facts in this case,” said Mary Dorhmann, one of Floris’s lawyers.
Faruqui, expressing frustration, later said that he would not “bless” the superseding complaint and ordered that it be struck from the record.
Floris and Benavides have not been indicted by a grand jury, so Faruqui is weighing whether there is enough probable cause to support the charges and move the case forward.
Prosecutors allege that Floris and Benavides, both of whom worked in the FBI’s Foreign Influence Task Force (FITF), lied about their knowledge and involvement in the bureau’s investigations into Hunter Biden.
The controversy erupted just weeks before the 2020 presidential election when the New York Post published stories based on the contents of a laptop that a Delaware repair shop owner said Hunter Biden had left there and never picked up. The FBI seized the laptop in 2019, but a copy of the hard drive was given to Trump’s personal attorney Rudy Guiliani, who passed it to the news outlet.
The contents included emails related to Hunter Biden’s foreign business dealings, including one that hinted at an alleged meeting between then-Vice President Joe Biden and an adviser to the Ukrainian gas company Burisma. The Biden campaign denied that a meeting ever occurred.
Federal investigators claim that the Floris and Benavides “knew about, and were actively involved in” the FBI’s investigations, citing documents and witness accounts that purportedly showed the two regularly discussed it within the FITF and with other FBI officials.
The government alleges that Floris and Benavides were not forthcoming about the FITF’s involvement when they spoke to lawmakers in 2023 about the FBI’s handling of the Biden investigations and that their “materially false” statements impeded the Judiciary Committee’s probe.
Ron Safer, an attorney representing Benavides, repeatedly pressed Special FBI Agent Bryan Witt to explain exactly how his client’s allegedly false statements affected the committee’s probe. Faruqui noted that materiality question was “at the heart” of the case.
“As an investigator, explain how Mr. Bonavides’s knowledge of whether or not there was a laptop that the FBI had in 2020 attributable to Hunter Biden, would have any impact on what the Judiciary Committee was investigating,” Safer said.
Witt admitted that he did not ask that question specifically to anyone on the committee.
The special agent also testified on Tuesday that he was concerned after being assigned to the case that it could be “viewed as political.” He said FBI Director Kash Patel directed the investigation into Floris and others the day after President Trump gave an Oval Office speech in July rehashing claims that the 2020 election was stolen.
The hearing is set to resume on Wednesday with additional testimony from Witt. A ruling from the judge is expected to follow.
Copyright 2026 Nexstar Media Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Read the full story at The Hill ↗
Skip to content
A federal magistrate judge criticized the Justice Department (DOJ) during a lengthy hearing on Tuesday for attempting to tack on new charges overnight in a case against two former FBI officials accused of lying to Congress about their knowledge regarding the federal investigation into Hunter Biden’s laptop ahead of the 2020 election.
“Why today on this one case have you changed the entire history of how you charge cases?” Judge Zia Faruqui asked DOJ lawyers, questioning whether the government was “afraid” of the probable cause inquiry.
“We are not afraid of a probable cause finding,” Assistant U.S. Attorney John Borchert responded.
Nikki Floris and Bradley Benavides each face one count of making false statements in connection with interviews given to the House Judiciary Committee in 2023.
The Justice Department sought to add obstruction charges in a superseding complaint filed just after midnight, a procedural maneuver Faruqui remarked was “inappropriate” and outside of the norm.
“It is not our court’s practice, and I think it’s appropriately not our practice that unsigned complaints are filed on the docket,” Faruqui said shortly into the hearing. “I think they should’ve filed nothing.”
Attorneys for Floris and Benavides argued that the DOJ’s actions raised concerns about the “accuracy and credibility” of the case against whom they described as “decorated” law enforcement veterans.
“The evidence is mounting that this prosecution is about some political football and not the law or the facts in this case,” said Mary Dorhmann, one of Floris’s lawyers.
Faruqui, expressing frustration, later said that he would not “bless” the superseding complaint and ordered that it be struck from the record.
Floris and Benavides have not been indicted by a grand jury, so Faruqui is weighing whether there is enough probable cause to support the charges and move the case forward.
Prosecutors allege that Floris and Benavides, both of whom worked in the FBI’s Foreign Influence Task Force (FITF), lied about their knowledge and involvement in the bureau’s investigations into Hunter Biden.
The controversy erupted just weeks before the 2020 presidential election when the New York Post published stories based on the contents of a laptop that a Delaware repair shop owner said Hunter Biden had left there and never picked up. The FBI seized the laptop in 2019, but a copy of the hard drive was given to Trump’s personal attorney Rudy Guiliani, who passed it to the news outlet.
The contents included emails related to Hunter Biden’s foreign business dealings, including one that hinted at an alleged meeting between then-Vice President Joe Biden and an adviser to the Ukrainian gas company Burisma. The Biden campaign denied that a meeting ever occurred.
Federal investigators claim that the Floris and Benavides “knew about, and were actively involved in” the FBI’s investigations, citing documents and witness accounts that purportedly showed the two regularly discussed it within the FITF and with other FBI officials.
The government alleges that Floris and Benavides were not forthcoming about the FITF’s involvement when they spoke to lawmakers in 2023 about the FBI’s handling of the Biden investigations and that their “materially false” statements impeded the Judiciary Committee’s probe.
Ron Safer, an attorney representing Benavides, repeatedly pressed Special FBI Agent Bryan Witt to explain exactly how his client’s allegedly false statements affected the committee’s probe. Faruqui noted that materiality question was “at the heart” of the case.
“As an investigator, explain how Mr. Bonavides’s knowledge of whether or not there was a laptop that the FBI had in 2020 attributable to Hunter Biden, would have any impact on what the Judiciary Committee was investigating,” Safer said.
Witt admitted that he did not ask that question specifically to anyone on the committee.
The special agent also testified on Tuesday that he was concerned after being assigned to the case that it could be “viewed as political.” He said FBI Director Kash Patel directed the investigation into Floris and others the day after President Trump gave an Oval Office speech in July rehashing claims that the 2020 election was stolen.
The hearing is set to resume on Wednesday with additional testimony from Witt. A ruling from the judge is expected to follow.
Copyright 2026 Nexstar Media Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Read the full story at The Hill ↗
This lens runs the verified story through Cinnamon's AI — wired in the next step.
- A federal magistrate judge criticized the Justice Department (DOJ) during a lengthy hearing on Tuesday for attempting to tack on new charges overnight in a case against two former…