A stunning $2 million DOJ settlement has conservatives questioning the agency’s integrity. Former FBI agents Peter Strzok and Lisa Page, embroiled in controversy over biased texts, received a massive payout. Who approved this deal, and why? The answer has sparked outrage and demands for accountability.

Summary

• DOJ settled with Peter Strzok and Lisa Page for $2 million.
• Settlement approved by Brian Netter, tied to anti-Trump lawfare.
• Lawsuits followed leaked texts showing anti-Trump bias.
• Critics slam payout as misuse of taxpayer funds.
• Deal raises concerns about DOJ’s impartiality.

A Costly Settlement for Disgraced Agents 

The Department of Justice (DOJ) finalized a $2 million settlement in 2024 to resolve lawsuits from former FBI Special Agent Peter Strzok and attorney Lisa Page. Strzok received $1.2 million, and Page was awarded $800,000 to settle claims over privacy violations after their anti-Trump text messages were publicly released. These texts, exchanged during the 2016 election, revealed their contempt for then-candidate Donald Trump while they worked on the FBI’s Trump-Russia investigation, often criticized as politically motivated.

The settlement infuriated many Americans who viewed it as a misuse of taxpayer money. The payout compensates Strzok and Page for the public disclosure of their texts, which many believed exposed their bias and undermined public trust in the FBI.

Shock Revelation In Controversial Approval 

The settlement was greenlit by Brian Netter, a DOJ official linked to what many described as“lawfare” against President Donald Trump. Breitbart reports that Netter has since taken a role leading legal efforts opposing Trump, fueling accusations of partisan bias within the DOJ. His involvement in approving the payout has raised questions about the agency’s impartiality.

“Just when you think it can’t get any more corrupt!” wrote @GenFlynn on X, criticizing Netter’s role in the settlement. The decision has amplified concerns that the DOJ is protecting figures who pushed a narrative against Trump.

The Text Message Firestorm 

Strzok and Page’s lawsuits stemmed from the 2017 release of their private text messages, which included derogatory remarks about Trump and references to an “insurance policy” in case he won the presidency. These texts, uncovered during an internal DOJ investigation, led to their removal from the Russia probe and sparked accusations of politicization within the FBI. 

The Federalist has described their actions as part of “the Clinton campaign’s Russian collusion hoax,” a narrative many have argued was designed to sabotage Trump’s campaign and presidency.

“The DOJ is supposed to uphold justice, not protect those who weaponize their positions,” said conservative commentator Sean Hannity on his Fox News program when news of the settlement first broke. The settlement has reignited debates about accountability and fairness in federal agencies.

Taxpayer Money Under Scrutiny 

Americans are outraged that taxpayer funds were used to settle with Strzok and Page, whom many view as central to a flawed investigation. The payout came amid broader concerns about “lawfare,” and  weaponization of the legal system against political opponents. The settlement highlights some of the DOJ’s  actions that critics say favor anti-Trump figures, with Netter’s involvement cited as evidence of systemic bias.

“This is an insult to every American taxpayer,” said Rep. Jim Jordan (R-OH), a staunch critic of DOJ overreach during a House hearing. “Paying out millions to Strzok and Page looks like a reward for their role in pushing a baseless narrative.”

Calls for DOJ Reform Grow Louder 

The settlement has intensified demands for greater oversight of the DOJ. GOP lawmakers are pushing for investigations into what they see as entrenched bias within the agency. The controversy follows other recent DOJ actions, such as filing a misconduct complaint against a D.C. judge for politicizing their role, a move celebrated by Sen. Eric Schmitt (R-MO) as a step toward accountability.

The Strzok-Page payout exemplifies a double standard, where figures tied to anti-Trump efforts are shielded while taxpayers foot the bill.