At first glance it might seem silly attempting to draw parallel between a pair of political “October surprises” — big-news revelations that fall like missiles from the sky just before an election. Let’s attempt it anyway.

Two years ago, FBI Director James Comey delivered a classic October surprise. On Oct. 28, 2016, just 11 days before the presidential election between Democrat Hillary Clinton and Republican Donald Trump, Comey notified congressional committee leaders that his agency had discovered new emails connected with the Hillary Clinton server investigation, and was delving into them. Three months earlier, Comey testified that Clinton had been “extremely careless” in handling classified information on a private email server, but he declined to press criminal charges.

The new revelation, and the lack of any clarifying details, created a media frenzy, sent the stock market into a brief tailspin and infuriated Clinton supporters.

John Podesta, Clinton’s campaign chairman, called on Comey to “immediately provide the American public more information than is contained in the letter” he sent to the committee chairmen. Podesta added, “Comey’s letter refers to emails that have come to light in an unrelated case, but we have no idea what those emails are and the Director himself notes they may not even be significant. It is extraordinary that we would see something like this just 11 days out from a presidential election.”

The Trump campaign, of course, reacted with delight. The Oct. 28, 2016, edition of the New Yorker reported, “Trump himself ... told a rally in New Hampshire, ‘I have great respect for the fact that the F.B.I. and the Department of Justice are now willing to have the courage to right the horrible mistake that they made’” in not pursuing criminal charges months earlier.

Now the tables are turned. Trump, who defeated Clinton, has his second Supreme Court nominee currently before the Senate Judiciary Committee. By nearly every measure, Judge Brett Kavanaugh has been called an ideal candidate for the high court, but an October surprise has surfaced — an allegation of sexual misconduct has been raised by a high school acquaintance from 36 years ago.

Is there a parallel? Consider Comey’s dismissal as FBI director in May. With Comey in charge, the agency determined Clinton was “extremely careless” but not criminally liable for leading classified information — and for returning to the case 11 days before a crucial presidential election, probably affecting the outcome. He was fired when he could not categorically tell Trump whether or not he was the subject of an investigation into alleged collusion with Russian agents.

Now the FBI — the agency that Comey was still directing four months ago — has a demand on it to investigate a 36-year-old allegation of a he-said, she-said incident involving and 15 year old girl and 17 year old boy. There is scant corroborating evidence — no police reports, only a therapist’s notes, which apparently don’t match what the accuser intends to testify now.

As host of the Iron Mountain Data Center in Cherry Township, many Butler County residents are aware of how background checks work. The FBI conducts extensive background checks on every federal employee. Judges are no exception. It would be a matter of routine to uncover and investigate reported incidents of any impropriety during a background check. Such improprieties have never surfaced in Kavanaugh’s case. Until now.

The allegation against a 17-year-old Kavanaugh seems far-fetched but remotely feasible. Also feasible: that candidate Trump colluded with the Russians; and that Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s cavalier handling of State Department secrets was criminally irresponsible.

There’s no time like October to find out the answers to all these and other political mysteries.