Stephanie Ruhle Lets the Cat Out of the Bag on Kamala Strategy in Discussion With Bill Maher

Once upon a time, it used to be understood that the purpose of journalism or media was to ask questions and report the news objectively on behalf of the people.

In the present day, that seems like a quaint, ancient thought, when much of the liberal media has gone all-in to be advocates for the Democratic Party and the narrative of the left.

One of the biggest problems that people have with Kamala Harris is that she hasn't been forthcoming about her positions. She's only done a handful of interviews and she's mostly filibustered answers or given some kind of ridiculous word salad that says nothing in response to questions. So, people aren't getting the answers that they deserve.

Now, I think you already have your answers about her because of the things she has done and failed to do while she's been occupying office for the last three-plus years. Not to mention all her prior radical statements about things like guns and the border. She hasn't improved the economy or the border during her time in office -- that's your answer right there; she and Biden actively made everything worse. Meanwhile, former President Donald Trump did improve both, while maintaining more peace in the world. It isn't a hard choice.

Kamala Campaigns in Wisconsin and Brings It All: Disinformation, Fake Accents, and Cackling Galore

But the discussion on Friday, on Bill Maher's HBO show, "Real Time" with NY Times columnist Bret Stephens and MSDNC's Stephanie Ruhle, was Orwellian in the extreme. Could you ever imagine a journalist - as we used to define journalism -- arguing that you should not be asking a presidential candidate questions? Indeed, how dare you do your job?

Yet, that's exactly what Ruhle argued when Stephens said we are owed answers to those questions. She claimed that it shouldn't matter whether or not Harris answered any questions about her plans because Trump is a "threat to democracy." She blasted Stephens for thinking that Harris should be required to answer questions, calling it "Nirvana."

Bret Stephens asks Stephanie Ruhle why Kamala Harris has not done interviews and stated clearly what her policy positions are. Ruhle responds that 'We don't live in Nirvana':
Bret Stephens: "I'm an undecided voter. I'm not sure I want to vote for Kamala. My fear is that she… pic.twitter.com/y80j8kDIWh
— Eric Abbenante (@EricAbbenante) September 21, 2024

"If you don't like her answer, are you going to vote for Trump?" Ruhle railed. "Kamala Harris is not running for perfect, she is running against Trump." Translation? You don't need to know anything other than she's a warm body.

"The problem that a lot of people have with Kamala is that we don't know her answer to anything," Stephens said. "I don't think it's a lot to ask for her to sit down for a real interview."

Ruhle dismissed that, "When you move to Nirvana, I'll be your next door neighbor. We don't live there."

She's not a journalist, she's an advocate for Harris.

Then Stephens tried to argue that they should tone down the language because isn't helping their argument. He also said people aren't buying what they're trying to sell about Trump being a "threat to democracy," saying "That dog is not going to hunt." He at least gets how the American people are rejecting the ridiculous nature of the attack. But Ruhle refused to let it go, saying she was "calling out the truth."

Bret Stephens warns Bill Maher and Stephanie Ruhle that the media repeatedly calling Trump a 'Threat to Democracy' is not working:
Bill Maher: "He got shot again, and he says 'Their rhetoric is causing me to be shot at.'
Bret Stephens: "We probably should tone it down. When we're… pic.twitter.com/65rooYjWf4
— Eric Abbenante (@EricAbbenante) September 21, 2024

Ruhle claimed Trump got fact-checked more because he lied more during the debate, of course ignoring Kamala's boatload of lies and that Trump was unfairly fact-checked--including over things he was right about.

Stephens warned them they have helped Trump with their false over-the-top attacks, making supporters more fervent about voting for him.

It's because Americans have the evidence of their own eyes and experiences that they don't buy this.

Please list how he is a "threat to democracy." Notice they don't say.

So, let's review who the "threat to democracy" is.

Maher suggests Trump doesn't concede elections. Trump challenged the results in 2020, but he also left when he didn't win the legal challenges. And they ignore the many Democrats who challenged the 2016 election, and all the efforts to try to stop Trump from taking office even though he had won. They forget about the riot during Trump's inauguration on Jan. 20, 2017, and they don't blame the Democrats for that riot.

Under Trump, we had more money in our pockets, low inflation, lower taxes, no new wars, more peace in the Middle East, and a more secure border. Trump didn't prosecute his opponents, he didn't try to kick them off ballots, and he didn't try to tie up his opponents in lawfare to cost them money. Trump wasn't the one who pushed aside the candidate that more than 14 million Democrats had voted for in the 2024 primary, and replaced him because they knew he was going to lose.

But Ruhle doesn't think we even should ask about that replacement or even what Harris knew when all that coup-ing went down. How is she ever going to hold Harris' foot to the fire on anything? They don't want you to ever question their dictates, even when their narrative is based on falsehoods and shifting sands. They don't want you to ask because it would expose all Harris' problems and how radical her positions are, which are incompatible with the positions of most Americans. The problem isn't just that we don't know her answers, the problem is that she isn't being straight with us about her positions. They want to slip her in without any real examination of those positions or her lies, based on hatred of Trump.

Journalists against people in power giving interviews. https://t.co/fJC06yEpEp
— Mary Katharine Ham (@mkhammer) September 21, 2024

Nothing to see here... just an alleged journalist advocating a presidential candidate's strategy to avoid any scrutiny. Because Trump. https://t.co/ZUEnA3sdmh
— Joe Concha (@JoeConchaTV) September 21, 2024