One of the worst responses a journalist can have to allegations that a public figure has a history of sexual misconduct is to claim to have known all along about the predatory behavior.

In short, don’t be like Cokie Roberts, the longtime fixture of Sunday morning news television. Don't respond like she did this weekend to reports alleging Rep. John Conyers, D-Mich., has sexually harassed multiple female staffers.

Conyers has been accused of trying to coerce employees into having sex with him. The Michigan representative, who has served in Congress since 1965, has been accused of inappropriate touching, caressing and other improprieties of a sexual nature.

Conyers’ office has also been accused of using public funds and highly-unusual and most likely illegal accounting tricks to settle a wrongful termination lawsuit brought against the congressman by a former staffer who claims he sexually harassed her.

The sexual misconduct allegations are credible, and the accusations of financial irregularities appear to be substantiated. It’s a serious story and it hints that there is much worse hidden away in Congress' books.

But Roberts stayed away from the important stuff this weekend, and she used the Conyers news instead to highlight her status as someone who is in-the-know. You see, she explained on ABC News’ “This Week,” all the right people knew about the congressman's alleged predatory behavior.

“The fact that people are willing to be public can change things. I mean, we all talked about it for years,” she said.

Roberts added, “Don’t get in the elevator with him, you know, and the whole every female in the press corps knew that, right, don’t get in the elevator with him. Now people are saying it out loud. And I think that does make a difference.”

This gabby response to the Conyers news is maddening for several obvious reasons.

First, it’s a nauseating bit of all-too-obvious bragging.

Oh, this thing that you’re all shocked to learn? That has been a secret around this town for years. How sweet that you’re just now hearing of it.

We get it: Roberts wants us to think she has her ear to the ground. So, naturally, she responded to the Conyers story by positioning herself as some sort of savvy insider; someone who has the inside scoop on the hottest stories. Good for you, Roberts.

This leads to the second reason as to why her reaction is particularly loathsome: If Roberts is indeed the keen know-it-all she claims to be – doubtful, but let’s play along – the fact that she is in no way responsible for reporting what we know today about Conyers’ alleged sexual misconduct reflects very, very poorly on her. If you’re in media, and you hear from multiple sources that a member of Congress is abusing his office, and you do little to nothing to bring it light, what good are you? If Roberts can't pull on a thread alleging a longtime member of Congress is a serial sexual abuser, she ought to make way for someone who can.

This brings us to the third and final point: Roberts' wink-wink response is maddening because it has become the norm in the news industry. Access journalism is the coin of the realm. Consequence-free, gossipy insider “scoops" are valued more in political journalism than difficult, drawn-out and potentially career-ending investigative reporting. It’s not shocking, then, that a long-time news pundit would rather it appear she sat on a major story than she was out of the loop. After all, access journalism is the sort of thing that lands you seven-figure contributor deals. What does angering powerful members of Congress get you?

Roberts is far from alone in responding to these sexual misconduct stories in this manner. There were similar responses earlier this month when ex-CBS anchor Charlie Rose and infamous access journalist Mark Halperin were both accused of preying on female subordinates.

Oh, that has been an open secret for years. Yes, I had also heard those stories, too.

Great. If these same media personalities were aware of these persistent rumors, and they had tips from multiple sources, they should’ve investigated the stories. It’s the least a reporter can do. Now, it's one thing for alleged victims to remain silent, feeling intimidated. You can't blame them for that. But what can we say about the journalists who claim they just knew what was going on?

If they really were tipped off years ago about sexual misconduct, and they did nothing to report on it, they deserve our disdain. And if they didn’t know about the alleged predatory behavior, and they are revising history now so as to appear in-the-know, well, that also deserves our disdain. If it’s the former, journalism would be better served if these people found a new line of work.