Ironically, one consequence of Mr. Comey’s earlier showboating is that the American public does not appreciate that most of the handcuffs put on FBI investigators—the lack of a grand jury, the crazy immunity deals, the appearance of material witnesses (e.g., Heather Samuelson and Cheryl Mills) as counsel for Mrs. Clinton, the agreements to destroy laptops belonging to two Clinton aides—are areas where Justice, not the FBI, has authority.

Which today leaves both Mr. Comey and Mrs. Clinton with legitimate beefs. Mr. Comey must rightfully resent a Justice Department he bailed out with his July press conference now painting him as a Republican hack. For her part, Mrs. Clinton must be miffed by an FBI director who comes in at the last minute—at a moment when she is leading in a presidential election—to imply she may be guilty of something very bad while providing almost no detail.

Then again, both are in this fix entirely because of themselves. Mrs. Clinton was the one who decided she would take her entire communications as secretary of state off-grid—and she’s also the one who has been lying and doing everything to keep them from becoming public ever since she was caught. As for Mr. Comey, if his reputation as a square shooter is now in tatters, he did it by going where he had no business going and agreeing to Justice constraints he never should have agreed to.

It’s called rough justice. Which in any case involving Mrs. Clinton and Mr. Comey is probably the closest to real justice we will ever get.