Generally, in modern usage, if you have it, and I take it, then I am robbing you of it and stealing it from you. Why? Because that's the way these verbs work.

It used to be the case that I could rob it from you, although this usage is apparently rare now. Note the following usage note from Merrian-Webster:

Sense vt 1c, in which the direct object is the thing stolen, is sometimes considered to be wrong, or perhaps archaic. The sense has been in use since the 13th century and is found in earlier literature <contrive to rob the honey and subvert the hive — John Dryden>. It is still in use though not as common as other senses <then robbed $100 after the clerk fled — Springfield (Massachusetts) Morning Union>.

Generally, in modern usage, if you have it, and I take it, then I am robbing you of it and stealing it from you. Why? Because that's the way these verbs work.

It used to be the case that one could say that I was robbing it from you, although this usage is apparently rare now. Note the following usage note from Merrian-Webster:

Sense vt 1c, in which the direct object is the thing stolen, is sometimes considered to be wrong, or perhaps archaic. The sense has been in use since the 13th century and is found in earlier literature <contrive to rob the honey and subvert the hive — John Dryden>. It is still in use though not as common as other senses <then robbed $100 after the clerk fled — Springfield (Massachusetts) Morning Union>.