2026-11-02T11:22:00-0500 / CBS新闻
周一，一名联邦治安法官驳回了一份刑事诉状。该诉状指控两名前联邦调查局（FBI）高级反情报官员就其在FBI亨特·拜登调查中的角色向国会撒谎，法官称这起带有政治色彩的案件缺乏证据，且提起时间恰在中期选举前夕。
治安法官齐亚·法鲁基在长达一小时的严厉口头裁决中，痛斥司法部和FBI的所谓”草率”案件——没有任何合理依据证明尼基·弗洛里斯和布拉德利·贝纳维德斯犯下了罪行。
“没有动机，没有直接证据，我什么都没有，”他说，”差距极大，毫无说服力。”
“我对这起案件发生的一切深感不安，”法鲁基说，”这里发生的事情只能被描述为政治操弄。”
尽管诉状已被驳回，司法部仍可就法鲁基的裁决向首席法官提起上诉，或寻求大陪审团起诉。
一名司法部发言人表示，他们”不同意治安法官的决定，该决定显然暗示高级政府官员向国会作出实质性虚假陈述可免于问责，这实在令人惊讶”。
“我们正在评估所有选项，但无法就正在进行的刑事调查发表更多评论，”该发言人说，”司法部的行动将始终以事实、证据和法律为准——而非政治。”
CBS新闻已联系FBI和华盛顿特区美国检察官办公室寻求置评。
弗洛里斯曾是FBI华盛顿外勤办公室的前顶级情报分析师，而贝纳维德斯则是FBI反情报司前副助理主任。裁决宣布后，两人在法庭外拥抱，弗洛里斯喜极而泣。
他们身旁簇拥着众多前来声援的前司法部和FBI高级官员，其中包括前FBI代理局长布莱恩·德里斯科尔和前FBI华盛顿外勤办公室主任史蒂夫·延森。
“这起案件本就不该被提起，”弗洛里斯的代理律师之一玛格丽特·多诺万在法庭外向记者发表声明时表示，”这份诉状仓促拼凑，如同把意大利面扔向墙壁想看看是否能粘住，是亨特·拜登相关的阴谋妄想。但在法庭上，事实依然重要。”
针对弗洛里斯和贝纳维德斯的刑事案件自本月初曝光以来就非同寻常。
检察官以刑事诉状提起指控，而这种起诉文件通常仅用于涉及公共安全或国家安全威胁的重罪案件。通常情况下，检察官会在提起指控前先获得大陪审团起诉。
在上周二法院听证会首日前夕的午夜过后，检察官利用一份未签字、未宣誓的替代诉状试图添加妨碍国会的新指控——这一举措被治安法官认定为不当且闻所未闻。
法鲁基将这份替代诉状从案卷中删除，称其缺乏适当的司法审查。但他允许原诉状的听证会继续进行，最终这场为期三天的证据听证会演变成一场马拉松式听证，并在周一作出了这一非同寻常的裁决。
在这三天中，被指派协助调查的FBI特工布莱恩·威特向法庭坦言，这起案件的处理方式与他职业生涯中的任何案件都不同。
他作证称，这起案件是在FBI局长卡什·帕特尔的授意下启动的，当时正值7月唐纳德·特朗普总统发表电视演讲的一天后——特朗普在演讲中指控情报官员策划掩盖中国对2020年选举的干预，并要求司法部提起公诉。调查期间，包括FBI副局和帕特尔本人在内的高级官员多次过问进展。
威特还承认，他担心这起案件可能被视为政治操弄，他所在的堪萨斯城FBI外勤办公室的其他人员也担忧这是一场政治迫害。
法鲁基本人曾是联邦检察官，他还一度朗读了司法部手册中的规定——该规定要求检察官不得采取旨在影响选举结果的秘密调查或起诉步骤。
“为什么这起案件要在2026年10月提起指控？”他大声问道，并指出该案件没有面临近期诉讼时效到期的问题。
“除了中期选举，日历上没有其他任何事件，”他说，并补充道，他拒绝掩耳盗铃，假装时间点不是问题。
“我不会以这种方式自我蒙蔽，”他补充道。
针对弗洛里斯和贝纳维德斯的案件依据的是他们在2023年7月和9月向众议院司法委员会提供的证词。
具体而言，案件聚焦于外国影响力特别工作组（FITF）开展的一项名为”圆河”的FBI反情报行动。检察官表示，该行动的重点是收集”针对亨特·拜登等人的负面线人报告，并将其标记为俄罗斯虚假信息”。
诉状显示，弗洛里斯在2019年年中至2022年年中担任FITF副助理主任，而贝纳维德斯则在2019年年中至2020年大选期间担任该部门主管。
在这些职位上，弗洛里斯和贝纳维德斯在2020年8月向参议员查尔斯·格拉斯利和罗恩·约翰逊提供了防御简报，这最终促使众议院司法委员会在三年后传唤两人作证。
在为期三天的案件听证会上，证据薄弱和调查不足的问题逐渐暴露。
为了证明虚假陈述案件的合理依据，检察官必须证明被告作出了虚假陈述、存在明知故犯的主观故意，且该陈述具有实质性影响。
周一，法鲁基逐一核对了每项指控要素，认定政府未能满足所有门槛要求。
他将政府的诉状与此前满足所有指控要素的虚假陈述案件进行了对比，列举了针对前特朗普国家安全顾问迈克尔·弗林、前副总统迪克·切尼办公厅主任刘易斯·” Scooter”·利比的案件。
“在我看来，仓促调查另有目的，那就是急于起诉——这是个问题，”他说。
威特在作证时承认，例如，共和党控制的众议院司法委员会拒绝让FBI特工采访出席弗洛里斯和贝纳维德斯听证会的国会工作人员——而这是确立案件实质性影响的关键步骤。
他最终被允许交谈的唯一人员是众议院司法委员会共和党总法律顾问史蒂夫·卡斯特，而后者承认他并未见证贝纳维德斯的证词或阅读过证词记录。威特未与委员会的任何民主党人士交谈过。
职业检察官后来意识到这一致命错误，并试图在案件起诉前提及。在政府向辩护律师披露的一段录音中，美国检察官珍妮恩·皮罗的特别法律顾问卡尔顿·戴维斯可被听到承认了这一错误。
“我这边被这事儿搞得焦头烂额，”法鲁基引用戴维斯的话说，”我知道这是我们的搞砸了。”
法鲁基还指出，原起诉书与他后来驳回的替代版本相比存在多处错误——甚至威特本人在法庭上也作出了虚假陈述——他表示这些陈述不构成犯罪，因为他认为威特并无撒谎意图。
他公开质疑政府在决定起诉前为何未能对案件进行压力测试，并将这三天的听证会比作起诉书审查。
他表示，政府没有在司法部内部私下解决问题和错误，而是将这些问题”公开在法庭上暴露给全世界看”。
他还对案件可能造成的连锁后果感到遗憾，称这实际上是”劝阻人们加入FBI的宣传材料”，并会对国会获取证词的能力产生”寒蝉效应”。他表示，未来国会可以预期会有更多人援引第五修正案，且会像弗洛里斯和贝纳维德斯那样被劝阻不要自愿出席。
最重要的是，他预测这起案件将削弱公众对司法部的信心，并表示他不仅为被告感到遗憾，也为被迫参与其中的职业检察官和特工感到遗憾。
“本案驳回，”他说，”很抱歉你们被卷入了这场风波。”
雅各布·罗森为本报道作出了贡献。
属于：
FBI
亨特·拜登
Judge dismisses case against 2 ex-FBI officials in Hunter Biden probe
2026-11-02T11:22:00-0500 / CBS News
A federal magistrate judge on Monday dismissed a criminal complaintchargingtwo former senior FBI counterintelligence officials with lying to Congress about their roles in the bureau’s Hunter Biden investigation, saying the politically charged case lacked evidence and appeared to be timed with the midterm election.
In a scathing, hour-long oral ruling, Magistrate Judge Zia Faruqui rebuked the Justice Department and the FBI for what he called a “slapdash” case that lacked any probable cause that there was evidence Nikki Floris or Bradley Benavides had committed a crime.
“Without motive, without direct evidence, I have nothing,” he said. “It’s not close. It’s nothing.”
“I am deeply troubled by what has happened in this case,” Faruqui said. “What has transpired here can’t be described as anything other than weaponization.”
Although the complaint was dismissed, the Justice Department could still appeal Faruqui’s ruling to the chief judge or seek a grand jury indictment.
A Justice Department spokesperson said it “disagrees with the Magistrate’s decision, which remarkably appears to suggest that high-ranking government officials are immune from accountability for making materially false statements to Congress.”
“We are evaluating all options but cannot comment further on an ongoing criminal investigation,” the spokesperson said. “The Department’s actions will continue to be guided by the facts, the evidence, and the law — not politics.”
CBS News has also reached out to the FBI and the D.C. U.S. Attorney’s Office for comment.
Floris was a former top intelligence analyst in charge at the bureau’s Washington Field Office, while Benavides was the former deputy assistant director at the FBI’s Counterintelligence Division. The two embraced outside the courtroom after the decision as Floris cried tears of relief.
They were flanked by numerous former senior Justice Department and FBI officials who had come to support them, including former Acting FBI Director Brian Driscoll and Steve Jensen, the former head of the FBI’s Washington Field Office.
“This case should have never been brought,” said Margaret Donovan, one of Floris’ attorneys, in a statement to reporters outside the courthouse. “This was a slapdash complaint, spaghetti at the wall, Hunter Biden conspiracy fever dream. But facts still matter in a courtroom.”
The criminal case against Floris and Benavides has been highly unusual since it first came to light earlier this month.
Prosecutors charged the pair in a criminal complaint, a charging document that is generally only used in felony cases that pose exigent public safety or national security threats. Usually, prosecutors secure a grand jury indictment before filing charges.
After midnight on the eve of the court hearing’s first day last Tuesday, prosecutors used an unsigned and unsworn superseding complaint to try to add new charges of obstructing Congress — a maneuver the magistrate judge said was improper and unheard of.
Faruqui struck the superseding complaint from the record, saying it lacked proper judicial review. But he allowed the hearing on the original complaint to proceed in a marathon evidentiary proceeding with three days of testimony that culminated in Monday’s extraordinary decision.
Throughout those three days, FBI Special Agent Bryan Witt, who was assigned to help investigate the matter, candidly acknowledged to the court that the case had not been handled like any other in his career.
He testified that it was opened at the behest of FBI Director Kash Patel just one day after President Donald Trump gave a televised speech in July where he accused intelligence officials of engaging in a coverup to hide China’s interference in the 2020 election and ordered the Justice Department to pursue prosecutions. Throughout the investigation, senior officials including the FBI’s deputy directors and Patel himself checked on the progress.
Witt also acknowledged that he feared it might be viewed as political and that others in his FBI field office in Kansas City were concerned it was a witch hunt.
Faruqui, a former federal prosecutor himself, at one point also quoted aloud from the Justice Department Manual, which stipulates that prosecutors should not take overt investigative or prosecutorial steps intended to affect or influence the outcome of an election.
“Why did this have to be charged in October 2026?” he asked out loud, noting there was no concern with the statute of limitations expiring in the near future.
“There was simply no other event on the calendar, except for the midterm elections,” he said. He added that he refused to bury his head in the sand and pretend the timing was not an issue.
“I will not lobotomize myself in this way,” he added.
The case against Floris and Benavides hinged on testimony they had provided to the House Judiciary Committee in July and September 2023.
In particular, it focused on an FBI counterintelligence operation by the Foreign Influence Task Force known as “Round River,” which prosecutors said was focused on collecting “derogatory informant reporting on, among other things, Hunter Biden, to flag the reporting as Russian disinformation.”
Floris served as the deputy assistant director of the FITF from mid-2019 through mid-2022, while Benavides served as its section chief from mid-2019 through the 2020 election, according to the complaint.
In those roles, Floris and Benavides provided defensive briefings to Sens. Charles Grassley and Ron Johnson in August 2020, and this ultimately led the House Judiciary Committee to summon the pair to testify about three years later.
During the three-day hearing on the case, problems with the strength of the evidence and the lack of adequate investigation came to light.
In order to show probable cause in a false statements case, prosecutors must demonstrate that the defendants made false statements, that they did so knowingly and willfully, and that those statements were material.
Faruqui ticked through each of the three elements of the offense on Monday, finding that the government had failed to meet each threshold.
He compared and contrasted the government’s complaint with prior false statement cases where the elements of the offense had been met, citing the cases against former Trump national security adviser Michael Flynn and former Vice President Dick Cheney’s chief of staff, Lewis “Scooter” Libby.
“It’s clear to me the rushed investigation had a goal. It was a rush to charge — and that is a problem,” he said.
During his testimony, Witt acknowledged, for instance, that the Republican-controlled House Judiciary Committee had refused to allow FBI agents to interview congressional staffers who had been present for Floris and Benavides’ testimony — a crucial step needed to establish materiality in the case.
The only person he was ultimately allowed to speak with was Steve Castor, the general counsel for the House Judiciary Republicans, who acknowledged he had not witnessed Benavides’ testimony or reviewed the transcript. Witt did not speak with anyone on behalf of the committee’s Democrats.
Career prosecutors later realized the potentially fatal mistake and tried to raise it before the case was charged. In a taped conversation released to defense lawyers by the government, Carlton Davis, a political appointee who is special counsel to U.S. Attorney Jeanine Pirro, could be heard admitting the mistake.
“I have one issue that I’m getting hammered on over here,” Faruqui quoted Davis as saying. “I realize this is our f***-up.”
Faruqui also noted there were numerous errors in the original charging document compared with the superseding version he later dismissed — and even Witt himself made misstatements on the stand — misstatements he noted were not criminal because he did not think Witt intended to lie.
He openly pondered why the government had failed to pressure test the case before proceeding to charge it, and likened the three-day hearing to the equivalent of an indictment review.
Instead of working out the problems and the mistakes privately within the Justice Department, he said, those issues got worked out “in open court for the whole world to watch.”
He also lamented the collateral consequences that the case could have, noting it was practically “marketing material” for deterring people from joining the FBI’s ranks, and would have a “chilling effect” on Congress’ ability to take people’s testimony. In the future, he said, Congress can expect that more people will plead the Fifth Amendment, and be deterred from appearing voluntarily as Floris and Benavides both did.
Above all, he predicted the case would erode confidence in the Justice Department and said he also felt sorry not just for the defendants, but also for the career prosecutors and agents who were forced to participate.
“This case is dismissed,” he said. “I am sorry you have been dragged through this process.”
Jacob Rosen contributed to this report.
In:
FBI
Hunter Biden
发表回复