Judge who apologized to accused would-be Trump assassin lights up DOJ in Hunter Biden FBI case
Developing story first seen 4 hours ago
Judge Zia Faruqui rejected the Justice Department’s attempt to add obstruction charges against two former FBI officials, saying prosecutors had filed an unsigned, unsworn complaint without first obtaining judicial approval. He called the filing inappropriate and harmful to the defendants, and allowed the preliminary hearing to proceed on the original allegations.
Nikki Floris and Bradley Benavides were arrested last week over alleged false statements to Congress about their roles in investigations involving Hunter Biden. The revised complaint softened the descriptions of their involvement, saying they were “involved in” the FBI task force’s work rather than at its “centre”, and that Floris took part in “conversations” rather than “scores of conversations”. Their lawyers said the changes raise questions about the case’s factual basis.
- Sources
- 2
- Outlets
- 2
- Left · Centre · Right
- 0 · 0 · 2
In short
- Judge rejects the DOJ’s attempt to add charges without judicial approval.
- The hearing proceeds on the original allegations against two former FBI officials.
- Revised wording softens claims about their roles in Hunter Biden investigations.
How this story developed
- 5 minutes ago Judge Zia Faruqui rejected the Justice Department’s attempt to add obstruction charges against two former FBI officials, saying prosecutors had filed an unsigned, unsworn complaint without first obtaining judicial approval.
- 1 hour ago Magistrate Judge Zia Faruqui rejected a Justice Department attempt to add obstruction charges against two former FBI officials, saying prosecutors had filed an unsigned, unsworn complaint without first obtaining judicial approval.
Explained simply
Hunter Biden is the son of Donald Trump’s predecessor, Joe Biden, and was the subject of federal investigations by the FBI, the US agency that investigates federal crimes. Nikki Floris and Bradley Benavides are former FBI officials accused of making false statements to Congress about their roles in work related to those investigations.
The Justice Department brings federal criminal cases, while judges oversee court proceedings and decide whether charges can go forward. The dispute centres on the process for adding charges and on descriptions of how closely the two officials were involved; their lawyers say changes to those descriptions raise questions about the case’s factual basis.
The case matters because it concerns how prosecutors must follow court procedures and how allegations against public officials are presented and tested. It also sits amid wider political debate over investigations involving the Biden family and the work of federal law enforcement.
Coverage · 2 sources
Bias meters
From 2 rated sources.