Former FBI official Nikki Floris broke down in tears outside a federal courtroom Tuesday as she faced a preliminary hearing on charges that she and another former bureau official lied to Congress about burying the Hunter Biden laptop story.

Floris was seen weeping in a courthouse hallway during a break in the probable cause hearing in the district court for Washington, DC. The emotional scene unfolded as prosecutors sought to keep the case moving forward.

The ex-FBI official who once helped manage the Hunter Biden laptop response is now CRYING in a courthouse hallway

Nikki Floris and a former task force colleague turned themselves in last week after telling Congress in 2023 they barely knew about the laptop. But internal messages and staff accounts suggest they tracked the case and helped manage the FBI’s public response before the 2020 election. One claimed he learned about it from Wikipedia. A judge blocked a last-minute attempt to add charges, but the original case continues. Source: NYP / Writer: Lucas — Mario Nawfal (@MarioNawfal) October 28, 2026

Floris and fellow former FBI official Bradley Benavides surrendered last week. Both face up to five years in prison if convicted of lying to the House Judiciary Committee in 2023 about their involvement in discrediting stories concerning the troubled first son.

US Magistrate Zia Faruqui presided over the hearing, which was intended to determine whether the Justice Department presented enough evidence to proceed with the prosecution. Floris and Benavides both served on the FBI’s Foreign Influence Task Force when they allegedly made false statements to the House panel.

WIKIPEDIA LIE BLOWN UPFormer FBI officials Nikki Floris & Bradley Benavides in preliminary hearing TODAY for lying to Congress about the Hunter Biden laptop.

Floris: “No discussions about Hunter.” Evidence: She discussed him constantly. Benavides: “I learned about the laptop from Wikipedia.” Evidence: He was in the meetings. They helped shape the narrative before 2020. Now they’re charged. Kash Patel and Jeanine Pirro delivered. — Gunther Eagleman™ (@GuntherEagleman) October 27, 2026

Trump's Sovereign Wealth Fund: What Could It Mean For Your Money?

Faruqui did not issue a ruling after a full day of testimony. The probable cause question therefore remained unresolved, with the hearing scheduled to continue Wednesday.

The judge did hand the Justice Department a setback by striking down a superseding complaint filed against Floris and Benavides in the middle of the night. That amended complaint sought to add a new obstruction charge against both former officials.

Prosecutors did not obtain approval from a judge before filing the amended complaint. “Why today upend the entire history of how we charge cases?” Faruqui asked, arguing that prosecutors appeared “afraid” he was “not going to find probable cause.”

The government alleges that Floris and Benavides frequently discussed Hunter Biden and his laptop before the 2020 election. Prosecutors cited internal FBI messages, emails, and testimony from bureau employees as they laid out their case.

FREE Gun Law Map: Laws Don't Pause During Social Unrest

Those alleged discussions included helping with press inquiries after The Post published its bombshell Oct. 14, 2020 story about emails from Biden’s laptop. The story said officials pushed the false narrative that the laptop was Russian disinformation.

Floris testified before the House Judiciary Committee in 2023 that she had no knowledge about the laptop. Benavides claimed he first learned about the laptop through Wikipedia.

Two former FBI officials are facing criminal charges over what they told Congress about Hunter Biden's laptop investigation.

The DOJ says Bradley Benavides claimed he learned about the laptop story from Wikipedia, but prosecutors allege emails show he had already been in contact with the FBI team working on the investigation. Former FBI official Nikki Cole Floris is also accused of denying involvement in Hunter Biden-related discussions, with prosecutors pointing to emails they say contradict her testimony. Both deny wrongdoing through their attorneys. See the conflicting accounts and what the DOJ says happened behind the scenes: https://t.co/l4GEiiiLEv — Fox News (@FoxNews) October 24, 2026

FBI Special Agent Bryan Witt appeared as a government witness Tuesday and expressed disbelief that Benavides would not remember communications about the laptop before his congressional testimony. Witt was cross-examined by Benavides attorney Ron Safer.

“It’d be common sense to remember that stuff,” Witt said. He also testified that Benavides’ account to the House panel about learning of the laptop contradicted “tangible” evidence, including chat logs and direct message transcripts.

WATCH: Nikki Floris, who was just ARRESTED by the FBI for lying to Congress, testified in 2019 that the FBI had “learned their lesson” and would improve election security ahead of the 2020 election.

But behind the scenes, Floris said she was running a “shadow government” to keep election-related threats from President Trump. — J (@JayTC53) October 23, 2026

The government witness ultimately acknowledged a significant limitation in the evidence presented. Witt said he did not have direct evidence that Benavides’ claim was intentionally false.

Floris’ attorney, Margaret Donovan, pressed Witt to characterize the investigation of her client as a “witch hunt.” Witt refused to adopt that description during his testimony.

Donovan noted that President Trump had alluded to Floris and Benavides in a speech the night before Witt was assigned to the case. She also said both former officials were identified by name in a letter from the president directing the FBI to investigate the matter.

Witt acknowledged that he was “concerned [the investigation] would be viewed as political,” but he still declined to call it a “witch hunt.” He agreed with Donovan that the assignment he received from FBI Director Kash Patel was “unusual.”

The special agent remained adamant that he had been instructed to “investigate potential crimes.” Witt said he was not told that a crime had necessarily occurred or directed to investigate a specific crime as an established fact.

With no probable cause ruling issued after Tuesday’s testimony, the legal fate of the case remained pending. The hearing was slated to resume Wednesday.

The opinions expressed by contributors and/or content partners are their own and do not necessarily reflect the views of Objectivist. Contact us for guidelines on submitting your own commentary.