Judge calls Hunter Biden probe 'weaponized' in case dismissal
A federal magistrate ruled that the investigation against two ex-FBI agents was rushed and political, citing a start date linked to a presidential speech.
By Takeshi Davidson ·
U.S. Magistrate Judge Zia Faruqui dismissed a criminal complaint against two former FBI officials on Monday. The case had accused Nikki Floris and Bradley Benavides of making false statements to Congress. The judge described the investigation that led to these charges as rushed, overtly political, and riddled with critical mistakes.
In a ruling delivered from the bench, Faruqui used strong language to describe the handling of the case. He stated, “What has transpired here cannot be described as anything other than weaponization.” The dismissal marks a clear setback for the Justice Department, which had pursued the two former agents over their handling of information regarding Hunter Biden.
The judge pointed to the specific timing of the investigation as a primary concern. The case was opened one day after President Donald Trump delivered a primetime speech in July. In that address, Trump reiterated his grievances over the 2020 election loss. Faruqui noted that FBI Director Kash Patel mandated the investigation and maintained close oversight of its progress.
Faruqui also highlighted the timing of the legal filings. The statements in question were made in 2023, yet the Justice Department waited to bring charges until two weeks ago. This decision came just ahead of the midterm elections scheduled for Tuesday. The judge remarked that he would not pretend to be unable to read a calendar, signaling his view that the timing was not accidental.
The legal dispute stemmed from how Floris and Benavides described their involvement in the laptop investigation. The laptop was dropped off at a Delaware repair shop in 2019. The Justice Department alleged that the two agents misled lawmakers in 2023 about what they knew and how deeply they were involved in the probe. This case also touched on long-standing claims by Trump and Republican allies that the FBI suppressed potentially harmful information about the Biden family during the 2020 campaign.
During a preliminary hearing last week, the judge raised procedural questions. He questioned why the Justice Department used a criminal complaint instead of seeking a grand jury indictment. Criminal complaints are typically used when there is an urgent need to detain a defendant. The judge had never seen a case filed in such a manner before.
The hearing also revealed friction between the court and prosecutors. The Justice Department filed an amended complaint overnight, adding a new charge directly to the docket without first clearing it with the court. Faruqui criticized this unorthodox maneuver. An FBI agent who worked on the case testified that he had been concerned the investigation would appear political to the public.
Republican Senators Chuck Grassley of Iowa and Ron Johnson of Wisconsin had previously argued that a 2020 briefing by the agents undermined their own investigation. They claimed the briefing linked the Biden administration probe to Russian disinformation. The Justice Department may still attempt to pursue a grand jury indictment, but the current dismissal stands as a major procedural hurdle for the case.
