Former FBI Director James Comey doesn’t have a lot of friends these days.

When he came to the FBI job in 2013, he was heralded as a straight-up guy who kept his head above politics. The view stemmed in part from the fact that he served presidents of both parties. Comey was named a U.S. attorney and later deputy attorney general by President George W. Bush. President Barack Obama selected him for the FBI role.

But in retrospect it is telling that Comey’s props for being “non-partisan” also reflected – as far as the media was concerned – his role in the railroading of former Dick Cheney aide Scooter Libby during the Bush administration.

Libby was convicted of lying to the FBI based on testimony by a New York Times reporter who recently recanted. She says she was pressured into providing incorrect testimony by special prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald, whom Comey appointed.

The facade of impartiality has come crashing down with revelations about Comey’s plodding and feckless investigation of the Hillary Clinton email scandal during the twilight of the 2016 presidential campaign.

Comey became the scourge of the right and toast of the left when, in July 2016, he announced he would not recommend charges against Clinton for mishandling classified information. His fan base reversed when, in late October, Comey told Congress the FBI had reopened the Clinton matter. He said the agency had discovered potentially relevant emails in an unrelated criminal probe of the spouse of a Clinton aide. The tide turned again when a week before the election Comey again wrote Congress and said never mind.

Ultimately, many Democrats, including Clinton, blame Comey’s handling of the probe for costing her the election. It might have. But the more we learn about Comey’s actions, the more we conclude Clinton’s loss is no injustice.

There is growing evidence that Comey conducted his probe with a predetermination to clear Clinton. Perhaps he convinced himself he was acting in the country’s best interest by avoiding a politically wrenching prosecution. The problem is, that was not his job. Worse, he short-circuited the legal process to achieve this goal.

Comey was justly criticized when he announced that Clinton would not be charged because he himself had concluded “no reasonable prosecutor” would press the case. That wasn’t his decision to make. It is the purview of grand juries and prosecutors, whom Comey never consulted.

Initially, Comey drew fire for being arrogant and unprofessional. But details that have emerged in recent weeks suggest it was worse than that.

First came the disclosure that Comey drafted a statement exonerating Clinton weeks before his agency even questioned her. More recently, information emerged that Comey changed the wording of his draft statement because it originally said Clinton engaged in a per se violation of the law.

The draft said Clinton was “grossly negligent” in her handling of classified information. Comey changed that to “extremely careless.” The reason is obvious. Federal law specifies that “gross negligence” in handling classified information is a crime.

The fix was in. And for many Americans this lends truth to their worst suspicions about a dual standard of federal justice that puts the Hillary Clintons of the world above the law and the common citizen. If Comey really thought he was doing the nation a favor with all of this he was both arrogant and sadly mistaken.