A federal magistrate judge in Washington on Monday, November 2, dismissed the criminal complaint accusing former FBI officials Nikki Floris and Bradley Benavides of lying to Congress, ruling that prosecutors had shown no probable cause.
Magistrate Judge Zia Faruqui announced the ruling at the end of a preliminary hearing that ran over several days, CBS News reported. "Without motive, without direct evidence, I have nothing," he said. "It's not close. It's nothing." He then told the two defendants, "This case is dismissed," adding, "I am sorry you have been dragged through this process."
Faruqui went further than a routine finding. "What has transpired here can't be described as anything other than weaponization," he said, according to CBS.
Who the defendants are
Floris was a deputy assistant director of the FBI's Foreign Influence Task Force from mid 2019 to mid 2022 and later led intelligence analysis at the Washington Field Office. Benavides was a section chief on the same task force through the 2020 election and later a deputy assistant director in the Counterintelligence Division. The complaint accused both of lying to the House Judiciary Committee in testimony given in July and September 2023 about their roles in the bureau's Hunter Biden investigations. Both denied wrongdoing throughout.
How the case fell apart
The government charged the pair by complaint rather than by grand jury indictment, which is why a preliminary hearing was required at all. Under Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 5.1, a magistrate who finds no probable cause "must dismiss the complaint and discharge the defendant."
The hearing went badly for prosecutors from the first morning. As we reported in Judge Strikes Unsigned New Charges Against Two Ex-FBI Officials, the government filed an unsigned, unsworn superseding complaint adding obstruction counts after midnight, and Faruqui struck it. The case agent then testified that FBI Director Kash Patel ordered the investigation opened the day after a televised speech by President Trump, and that agents never interviewed Floris, which we covered in FBI Agent Testifies Patel Ordered the Probe.
On Monday, Faruqui said the evidence failed on each part of a false statements charge: that a statement was false, that it was made knowingly and willfully, and that it was material to Congress. CBS also reported that a prosecutor, Carlton Davis, was heard in a recorded call conceding, in an expletive, that the mistake was the government's own. CBS said it asked the Justice Department, the FBI and the U.S. Attorney's Office in Washington for comment.
Our count: ten days, three elements, zero met
By our arithmetic from the court dates, the case lasted 10 days, from the October 23 complaint to the November 2 dismissal. In that span the government filed two charging documents, one of which the judge struck within hours. A false statements charge has three elements the government must show, falsity, knowledge and willfulness, and materiality. Faruqui found probable cause on none of the three, which is as complete a rejection as Rule 5.1 allows.
The testimony at issue is old. Counting from July 2023 to the October 23, 2026 complaint is about 1,210 days, or roughly three years and three months. The general federal limit for noncapital crimes in 18 U.S.C. 3282 is five years, which by our arithmetic leaves the government until roughly July and September 2028 to try again on the same statements. CBS reported the judge saw no near term limitations problem.
What happens next
A dismissal at this stage is not an acquittal, and double jeopardy does not attach. The rule itself says a discharge "does not preclude the government from later prosecuting the defendant for the same offense." Prosecutors could ask a district judge to review Faruqui's ruling or take the case to a grand jury, CBS reported.
A grand jury route is not guaranteed to work either. Grand juries have not always gone along with the department this fall, as in Grand Jury Declines to Indict Cassidy Hutchinson. And any new filing would now come with a magistrate's on the record finding that the evidence was "nothing" and that the prosecution amounted to weaponization, words defense lawyers would be sure to put in front of the next judge.
For now, Floris and Benavides walk out of court with no pending charge, presumed innocent as they were from the start, and with a ruling that reads less like a technical dismissal than a rebuke of how the case was brought.
Two Taps News stories summarize reporting and the analysis discussed on Two Taps and Friends. They are not legal advice. Read our standards.
