“George, you’re forgetting who you are as a journalist if you think there’s only one side,” Paul said.
Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) tore apart ABC anchor George Stephanopoulos’ claims that no election fraud occurred and hammered his blatant left-wing bias.
The ABC host repeatedly grilled Paul on Sunday over whether he thought the election was stolen.
“This election was not stolen, do you accept that fact?” Stephanopoulos asked Paul on “This Week.”
“Well, what I would say that the debate over whether or not there was fraud should occur,” Paul replied. “We never had any presentation in court. Most of the cases were thrown out for lack of standing, a procedural way of not hearing it. A law was changed in secretary of state, not the state legislatures. There’s still a chance that those actually work their way up to the Supreme Court.”
“What I would suggest is, is that if we want greater confidence in our elections and 75% of Republicans agree with me is that we do need to look at election integrity and we need to see if we can restore confidence in the election,” Paul added.
Stephanopoulos insisted that Republicans don’t trust the election results because Trump lied to them.
“Seventy-five percent of Republicans agree with you because they were fed a big lie by President Trump and his supporters that the election was stolen,” Stephanopoulos snapped.
That’s when Paul schooled Stephanopoulos over his leftist bias and what his role in the media should look like.
“George, where you make a mistake is people coming from the liberal side like you, you immediately say everything’s a lie instead of saying there’s two sides to everything,” Paul said.
“Historically what would happen if I said In thought there were fraud, you would interview someone who said there wasn’t. Now you insert yourself in the middle and say the absolute fact is everything I’m saying is a lie.”
“There are two sides to every story,” Paul continued. “George, you’re forgetting who you are as a journalist if you think there’s only one side. You’re inserting yourself into the story to say I’m a liar because I want to look at secretaries of state who changed the laws. It happened. You can’t just sweep it under the rug—nothing to see here. You’re a fool to bring this up. A journalist would hear both sides. Not insert themselves in the story.”