A federal magistrate judge has dismissed the Justice Department's case against two former FBI officials accused of lying to Congress about investigations into Hunter Biden, finding that the government lacked probable cause and that he was 'deeply troubled by what has happened here', according to multiple news outlets. At a hearing in US District Court in Washington on Monday, Judge Zia Faruqui said the situation involving Nikki Floris and Bradley Benavides 'cannot be described as anything other than weaponization', MS NOW reported.
Faruqui said the government had failed to present evidence that statements the two officials made to the House Judiciary Committee in 2023 were knowingly false, and he accused the Justice Department of wrongly rushing the case ahead of the midterm election, MS NOW reported. He described the prosecution as a 'slapdash job'. According to the same outlet, he apologised to the government's lawyers, calling it 'incredibly unfair' that they had been assigned to defend the case, and added: 'This does not feel like an investigation. It feels like a broken one-wish willow obsession.'
The allegations against Floris and Benavides were unveiled on 23 October, when prosecutors brought a criminal complaint rather than seeking an indictment from a grand jury. Criminal complaints require only a judge's signature and are often used to obtain an arrest warrant in situations where prosecutors need to move quickly, a circumstance Faruqui had flagged as unusual. The alleged misconduct dated from years earlier.
Last week the judge refused to sign off on a superseding complaint that added an obstruction charge against the two former officials. 'I'm concerned with your view as to what the law is,' Faruqui told the prosecutors at a hearing last Tuesday. 'Why today, on this one case, have you changed the entire history of how you charge cases?'
Lawyers for Floris and Benavides praised the decision outside the courthouse later on Monday. 'This case should never have been brought. The government had no case, as the judge just laid out,' a lawyer for Floris said, describing the prosecution as a 'spaghetti-at-the-wall, Hunter-Biden-conspiracy fever dream'. A lawyer for Benavides said they hoped the Justice Department would not try to keep the case alive by seeking an indictment before a grand jury 'where they get to be behind closed doors and get to shape the narrative, and we are unable to present our side'.
The Justice Department did not immediately respond to a request for comment from CNBC.
Analysis
Why This Matters
- A federal magistrate has thrown out a case the Justice Department brought by criminal complaint rather than grand jury indictment, and did so in terms that question the prosecution's timing and motive.
- The judge's accusation that the case was rushed ahead of the midterm election puts a court's finding into an already charged political argument about how the Justice Department handles investigations touching the Biden family.
- The dismissal does not necessarily end the matter: the department could still take the case to a grand jury, the route the defence says it fears.
Background
Hunter Biden, a son of former US president Joe Biden, was the subject of a long-running federal investigation, and congressional committees examined how the Justice Department and FBI handled probes connected to him. Floris and Benavides appeared before the House Judiciary Committee in 2023. In the US federal system, a criminal complaint is a charging document signed by a judge and is typically used when prosecutors need to move quickly, while a grand jury indictment follows a secret proceeding in which prosecutors present their evidence.
Key Perspectives
Magistrate Judge Zia Faruqui: said the government lacked probable cause and did not show the officials' 2023 statements were knowingly false; described the prosecution as a 'slapdash job' and the situation as 'weaponization', according to MS NOW.
Lawyer for Nikki Floris: said the case 'should never have been brought' and that the government 'had no case, as the judge just laid out'.
Lawyer for Bradley Benavides: said they hoped the Justice Department would not seek a grand jury indictment, where prosecutors 'get to shape the narrative, and we are unable to present our side'.
What to Watch
- Whether the Justice Department presents the case to a grand jury, the step it did not take when the allegations were announced on 23 October.
- How the ruling is taken up in the midterm election campaign, given the judge's criticism of the case's timing.
- Whether the department offers any response; it had not commented when CNBC reported.
Checked
12 claims in this story checked against 1 source: 12 supported.
Show each claim
- SupportedA judge dismissed the DOJ case against two former FBI officials and said the government lacked probable cause.US Top News and Analysis: “Magistrate Judge Zia Faruqui ... saying he was "deeply troubled by what has happened here." Faruqui said the government lacked probable cause”
- SupportedFaruqui said the situation “cannot be described as anything other than weaponization,” according to MS NOW.US Top News and Analysis: “The situation "cannot be described as anything other than weaponization," he said, according to MS NOW.”
- SupportedFaruqui said he was “deeply troubled by what has happened here.”US Top News and Analysis: “saying he was "deeply troubled by what has happened here."”
- SupportedFaruqui said the government failed to present evidence that the officials’ 2023 statements to the House Judiciary Committee were knowingly false.US Top News and Analysis: “Faruqui said the government lacked probable cause and failed to present evidence that the officials' statements before the House Judiciary Committee in 2023 were knowingly false, MS NOW reported.”
- SupportedFaruqui accused the DOJ of wrongly rushing the case ahead of the midterm election.US Top News and Analysis: “He also accused the DOJ of wrongly rushing the case ahead of the midterm election .”
- SupportedFaruqui described the prosecution as a “slapdash job.”US Top News and Analysis: “reportedly tore into the DOJ over its "slapdash job" prosecuting ex-officials Nikki Floris and Bradley Benavides”
- SupportedFaruqui apologised to government lawyers and called it “incredibly unfair” that they had been assigned to defend the case.US Top News and Analysis: “The judge even apologized to the government's lawyers, calling it "incredibly unfair" that they were assigned to defend the flawed case.”
- SupportedFaruqui said, “This does not feel like an investigation. It feels like a broken one-wish willow obsession.”US Top News and Analysis: “"This does not feel like an investigation," Faruqui reportedly added. "It feels like a broken one-wish willow obsession."”
- SupportedProsecutors unveiled the allegations on 23 October using a criminal complaint rather than seeking a grand-jury indictment.US Top News and Analysis: “The DOJ did not take that step when they unveiled the allegations against Floris and Benavides on Oct. 23. Rather, despite the alleged misconduct taking place years earlier, prosecutors acquired a criminal complaint”
- SupportedCriminal complaints require only a judge’s signature and are often used to obtain an arrest warrant when prosecutors need to move quickly.US Top News and Analysis: “prosecutors acquired a criminal complaint, which only requires a judge's signature. Criminal complaints are often used to obtain arrest warrant in situations where prosecutors need to move quickly”
- SupportedLast week, Faruqui refused to approve a superseding complaint adding an obstruction charge, and told prosecutors, “I'm concerned with your view as to what the law is.”US Top News and Analysis: “last week refused to sign off on a superseding complaint that added an obstruction charge against the two ex-officials. "I'm concerned with your view as to what the law is," the judge told the prosecutors in a hearing last Tuesday.”
- SupportedA lawyer for Floris said, “This case should never have been brought. The government had no case, as the judge just laid out.”US Top News and Analysis: “"This case should never have been brought. The government had no case, as the judge just laid out," a lawyer for Floris said”