Defense lawyers for two former FBI counterintelligence officials urged a federal judge Thursday to dismiss a criminal complaint charging them with making false statements to Congress about Hunter Biden. The defense argues the case is an overtly political prosecution intended to appease former President Donald Trump.
The arguments concluded a hearing where lawyers for Nikki Floris and Bradley Benavides sought to portray the case as legally flawed and politically tainted. Testimony indicated the investigation was ordered by FBI Director Kash Patel and initiated shortly after Trump delivered a speech rehashing his unsubstantiated claims about the 2020 election loss to President Joe Biden.
"A political prosecution is always going to make for a shaky foundation for a criminal case," said Mary Dohrmann, a lawyer for Floris. She and Benavides are accused of downplaying their knowledge of a laptop that the Justice Department alleges Hunter Biden left at a computer repair shop in 2019. The laptop's contents were publicized the following year.
Key Decision Pending
U.S. Magistrate Judge Zia Faruqui did not issue an immediate ruling on the defense's request. Dismissal of the complaint would not prevent the Justice Department from seeking an indictment, but obtaining one could prove difficult, as grand juries in Washington have previously declined to approve charges in politically sensitive cases.
The alleged false statements were made in 2023 before the House Judiciary Committee during its investigation into Hunter Biden. The complaint asserts that while the officials downplayed their awareness of the laptop, they had participated in numerous discussions about it. Both were leaders of a now-disbanded FBI task force focused on foreign influence in elections.
Justice Department prosecutor James Kirkpatrick contended that the officials had a motive to minimize their knowledge due to Joe Biden's presidency at the time. Kirkpatrick suggested the officials may have been hesitant to discuss Hunter Biden and the laptop because, he stated, the task force did not publicly refute claims from some Democrats and former intelligence officials that the laptop was part of Russian disinformation rather than authentic.
"At the end of the day, the FITF got it wrong," Kirkpatrick said, referring to the Foreign Intelligence Task Force. "They didn’t quash the narrative that this laptop was the product of Russian disinformation. They didn’t correct the record."
Defense lawyers countered that their clients did not intentionally lie and that any potentially false statements resulted from vague questioning or memory lapses. "There is absolutely zero proof that Mr. Benavides knew and remembered and misled. They have to prove that the statements were made intentionally and not the result of confusion, mistake, faulty or other innocent reasons," said Ron Safer, a Benavides lawyer.
Safer disputed the prosecution's suggested motive, arguing that the Foreign Influence Task Force, which was closed by the Trump administration, never assessed the laptop's authenticity.
Investigation's Origins
The case was filed shortly before the midterm elections using a criminal complaint, a method typically reserved for swift arrests, rather than a grand jury indictment.
Bryan Witt, an FBI special agent who investigated the case, testified that he considered it a "huge distraction" from his other duties and acknowledged its potential political perception. He stated that Patel mandated the investigation and took an unusual level of interest, receiving regular updates. Witt also testified that the FBI was directed to investigate Floris after Trump's July speech, which amplified unverified theories about his 2020 election loss. Floris had previously faced scrutiny for ordering the withdrawal of an intelligence report that had not been properly vetted.