First things first: Chelsea Clinton herself has drawn attention to ThinkProgress editor Judd Legum’s thread on Harvey Weinstein, which begins by pointing out that the sexual harassment described in that New York Times piece is despicable.

Chelsea Clinton, of all people, probably doesn’t want to get into a discussion of despicable sexual behavior by men in power, but there you go: zero self-awareness.

In any case, it’s actually kind of sad that Legum’s thread takes the predictable turn that it does, and that it echoes the hot takes of so many on the left: sure, what Weinstein allegedly did is horrible, but what’s worse is the right trying to score points by wondering why Democrats kept taking his money when his behavior was apparently the biggest open secret in Hollywood.

We can’t argue the first point.

Like the liberal entertainers saying there are different standards of behavior for men in the movie business and men who hold high office?

And as we all know, the powerful in Hollwood …

We think we read somewhere that “Slime Machine” was Weinstein’s nickname around the office.

Ah, the old “distraction” from the actual discussion. So according to Legum, we’re not supposed to talk about Weinstein’s political influence, but focus only on Hollywood looking away and enabling Weinstein’s behavior. But isn’t that just what all those Democrats did when they accepted his donations and attended his star-studded fundraising parties?

And here’s the clincher:

See, conservatives don’t even really care about sexual harassment anyway — they’re just happy for the chance to slam a “liberal kingmaker.”

We could almost stay with Legum up until about Tweet No. 4, but nah.

* * *