ON
← Back to feed
U.S. Attorney Jeanine Pirro’s team acknowledged screwup in case against former FBI officials
United States🏛️ PoliticsCenter

U.S. Attorney Jeanine Pirro’s team acknowledged screwup in case against former FBI officials

U.S. Attorney Jeanine Pirro’s legal team admitted to a significant error in a criminal case against former FBI officials Nikki Floris and Bradley Benavides, according to testimony from Special Agent Ryan Witt. The initial charges alleged that the two officials made false statements to Congress regarding their knowledge of the Hunter Biden laptop investigation, but a key witness cited in the supporting affidavit was incorrectly identified as having attended both testimonies when they only attended one. During a preliminary hearing before Magistrate Judge Zia M. Faruqui, audio evidence revealed that Pirro’s aide, Carlton Davis, explicitly referred to the mistake as a 'screwup' while attempting to correct the record. Prosecutors subsequently filed a superseding complaint and new affidavit that lacked signatures from law enforcement officers or judges, leading the judge to dismiss the filing. The case originated from a directive by FBI Director Kash Patel following President Donald Trump’s public complaints about election interference, and the accused officials have been frequent targets of criticism from the administration.

U.S. Attorney Jeanine Pirro’s legal team admitted to a significant error in a high-profile criminal case against two former Federal Bureau of Investigation officials during a telephone conference, according to testimony given by a special agent. The admission emerged during a preliminary hearing before Magistrate Judge Zia M. Faruqui to determine if probable cause exists for the charges. Nikki Floris and Bradley Benavides face allegations of making false statements to Congress regarding their knowledge of an investigation into Hunter Biden’s laptop. They were originally charged last week based on a sworn affidavit submitted by Special Agent Ryan Witt. During Thursday’s proceedings, Witt revealed that the affidavit incorrectly identified a congressional staffer as being present for both defendants’ testimonies. In reality, the individual was only present for Benavides’ session. Witt stated that he contacted the staffer, Steve Castor, the general counsel for the House Judiciary Committee, on Monday. Pirro and her aide, Carlton Davis, joined the call. Audio of this exchange was played in court. Davis explicitly referred to the situation as a mistake and requested assistance locating a witness who had actually attended Floris’ testimony. Witt confirmed he has yet to speak with such a person. Prosecutors subsequently filed a superseding complaint and a new affidavit late Monday, neither of which bore the signature of a law enforcement officer or judge. Judge Faruqui rejected the new complaint on Tuesday. Floris’ attorney, Mary Dohrmann, argued that the evidence demonstrates how external pressure affects sensitive investigations. She noted additional errors in the initial affidavit and claimed that quotes attributed to her client lacked necessary context. Benavides’ lawyer, Ron Safer, described the proceeding as a political prosecution intended to appease President Donald Trump. He stated that allowing politics to influence the legal process carries a cost. Witt testified that he assumed responsibility for the case in July following a directive from FBI Director Kash Patel. This order instructed the Kansas City field office to investigate specific individuals, including Floris. The directive arrived one day after Trump addressed the nation from the Oval Office, criticizing "rogue bureaucrats" for suppressing information about Chinese interference in the 2020 election. Both Floris and Benavides participated in FBI election security efforts and have faced criticism from Trump supporters. Witt expressed discomfort with the assignment, citing concerns that it might appear political. He further testified that senior FBI leadership, including Patel and Deputy Directors Chris Raia and Andrew Bailey, monitored the case's progress through meetings and updates. Bailey recently resigned from his position. Davis, listed as special counsel in Pirro’s office, previously served as a Republican staffer on the House Select Committee on Benghazi. He was also involved in a failed attempt to indict six sitting members of Congress over social media comments urging military personnel not to follow illegal orders. Judge Faruqui indicated he intends to issue a written ruling on the probable cause motion on Monday morning. The defense continues to press for the dismissal of the charges.

How this report was made. Objective News wrote this report from 2 source articles, using AI-assisted synthesis under our methodology. It is our own text, not a copy of any single outlet. Read our methodology.

Responsible editor: Matej BašaSpotted an error? Report it

2 reports

NBC News logoNBC NewsIndependentProgressiveFactual 92Objective 85
U.S. Attorney Jeanine Pirro’s team acknowledged screwup in case against former FBI officials

U.S. Attorney Jeanine Pirro’s legal team admitted to a significant error in a criminal case against former FBI officials Nikki Floris and Bradley Benavides, according to testimony from Special Agent Ryan Witt. The initial charges alleged that the two officials made false statements to Congress regarding their knowledge of the Hunter Biden laptop investigation, but a key witness cited in the supporting affidavit was incorrectly identified as having attended both testimonies when they only attended one. During a preliminary hearing before Magistrate Judge Zia M. Faruqui, audio evidence revealed that Pirro’s aide, Carlton Davis, explicitly referred to the mistake as a 'screwup' while attempting to correct the record. Prosecutors subsequently filed a superseding complaint and new affidavit that lacked signatures from law enforcement officers or judges, leading the judge to dismiss the filing. The case originated from a directive by FBI Director Kash Patel following President Donald Trump’s public complaints about election interference, and the accused officials have been frequent targets of criticism from the administration.

Bias read (Progressive): The article frames the prosecution as politically motivated and procedurally flawed, emphasizing the admission of a 'screwup' and the lack of proper signatures on the revised filings. It contextualizes the case within broader conflicts between the current administration and former intelligence staff

Why factuality (92): The article provides highly specific, verifiable details regarding the procedural history, including the names of the agents, judges, and aides involved, as well as the timeline of events from the initial complaint to the magistrate's rejection. It accurately reflects the core facts of the 'false st

Why objectivity (85): The tone is largely journalistic and neutral, focusing on the procedural failure rather than assigning moral blame beyond what the sources stated. While the headline uses the word 'screwup,' the body text attributes this characterization directly to the prosecutor's aide via a witness's testimony, m

The Washington Times logoThe Washington TimesParty-alignedConservativeFactual: no official source document/info detectedObjective 40
Ex-FBI officials accused of false statements about Hunter Biden press for dismissal of charges

Defense attorneys for two former FBI counterintelligence officials requested a federal judge to drop criminal charges alleging they made false statements to Congress regarding Hunter Biden. The legal team characterized the indictment as a politically motivated action designed to appease President Donald Trump. This motion highlights ongoing tensions between law enforcement accountability and executive influence in high-profile investigations involving prominent political figures.

Bias read (Conservative): The article frames the defense's argument by explicitly labeling the prosecution as 'overtly political' and intended to 'placitate' the President, adopting a narrative that suggests improper executive interference rather than legitimate judicial process. While it reports the legal motion factually,

Why factuality: no official source document/info detected

Why objectivity (40): The writing exhibits significant bias through the use of loaded language. Describing the case as an 'overtly political prosecution aimed at placating President Donald Trump' is a strong subjective interpretation and accusation rather than a neutral description of the defense's arguments. This framin

How each side covered it

The same event, grouped by the political lean of the outlets covering it.

How each side covered it

Support independent, bias-aware news and unlock the social pulse, community voting, and every other Supporter feature.

Become a Supporter

Covered around the world

The same event as reported in other countries.

Covered around the world

Support independent, bias-aware news and unlock the social pulse, community voting, and every other Supporter feature.

Become a Supporter

Claims check

Key factual claims, and how many sources assert vs dispute each.

Claims check

Support independent, bias-aware news and unlock the social pulse, community voting, and every other Supporter feature.

Become a Supporter

Keep the news honest.

ObjectiveNews is reader-funded and ad-free — we show you the bias instead of hiding it. Support independent journalism for €4/month.

Become a Supporter

Related stories