A federal judge delivered a sharp rebuke to President Donald Trump's Justice Department on Monday, dismissing criminal charges against two former FBI officials and accusing federal prosecutors of weaponizing the justice system just days before the midterm elections.

U.S. Magistrate Judge Zia Faruqui threw out the government's case against Nikki Floris and Bradley Benavides, former FBI officials accused of lying to Congress about their knowledge of the Hunter Biden laptop investigation.

The judge concluded that prosecutors had failed to establish probable cause that either official intentionally made false statements.

But Faruqui's criticism extended far beyond the weakness of the evidence.

"What has transpired here cannot be described as anything other than weaponization," the judge declared during an extraordinary hourlong ruling.

The prosecution stemmed from longstanding Republican allegations that FBI officials mishandled information concerning Hunter Biden's laptop during the 2020 presidential election.

Floris and Benavides previously served in leadership positions within the FBI's Foreign Influence Task Force, a unit responsible for investigating foreign interference in American elections.

Federal prosecutors alleged that the two officials had misrepresented their knowledge of the laptop and related investigations while answering questions from Republican congressional investigators in 2023.

However, Faruqui identified serious problems with the government's case, including factual errors, insufficient evidence of intentional deception, and questions about the timing of the prosecution.

Among the mistakes was a claim that the defendants had provided sworn congressional testimony when their statements had not actually been made under oath.

The judge also questioned why prosecutors pursued criminal complaints rather than presenting their evidence to a grand jury.

The timing raised additional concerns.

The charges were filed shortly before the November 3 midterm elections, when control of Congress hangs in the balance.

"I will not bury my head in the sand and pretend that I cannot read a calendar," Faruqui said.

Testimony during the proceedings revealed that an FBI investigator assigned to the case considered it a major distraction from his regular responsibilities.

The investigator also described unusual pressure surrounding the inquiry, including frequent updates requested by FBI Director Kash Patel.

According to testimony, the investigation began shortly after Trump publicly revisited allegations concerning the 2020 election.

The judge concluded that the government's rush to bring charges had contributed to critical investigative mistakes.

Attorneys representing the former officials described the prosecution as politically motivated and welcomed the dismissal.

The Justice Department disputed the ruling and indicated that it was considering its options. Prosecutors could still attempt to obtain an indictment through a grand jury.

The underlying Hunter Biden laptop controversy has remained a Republican political issue since 2020. Although federal investigators authenticated laptop evidence, that fact does not establish the separate allegations that these two FBI officials deliberately misled Congress.

The distinction proved central to Monday's decision.

The government was required to demonstrate probable cause that the defendants committed the alleged offenses, not merely establish that the laptop existed or that its contents were genuine.

Faruqui found that prosecutors had failed to meet that standard.

The ruling does not permanently prevent further prosecution, nor does it resolve every controversy surrounding the FBI's handling of the laptop.

It does, however, place an unusually direct judicial criticism of the Trump administration's prosecutorial conduct into the public record.

With Americans preparing to vote, a federal judge found himself questioning whether a criminal investigation had been rushed for political purposes rather than supported by sufficient evidence.

For an administration that has repeatedly promised to end the political weaponization of federal law enforcement, the judge's findings raise substantial questions about how that promise is being carried out.