In an era of increasingly blurred lines between opinion, entertainment, and journalism, former Congresswoman Tulsi Gabbard has done what few public figures have dared: she’s taken one of daytime television’s most watched programs to court. Gabbard has filed a $50 million defamation lawsuit against The View, accusing co-hosts Joy Behar and others of pushing “baseless, damaging, and politically motivated smears.”

And Joe Rogan? He’s here for it—with a flamethrower in hand.

On a recent episode of his Joe Rogan Experience podcast, the comedian and cultural commentator went scorched earth on The View, mocking its hosts and praising Gabbard’s legal move as long overdue accountability for what he called “a sample plate of journalistic malpractice.”

“These people have never read a book,” Rogan scoffed. “They have a national platform—and zero responsibility.”

The Lawsuit That Shook Daytime TV

Gabbard’s lawsuit stems from repeated accusations made by The View panel, including allegations that she was a “Russian asset,” a “traitor,” and a “Trojan horse” for foreign interests. These comments, according to the legal filing, not only defamed her character but also undermined her credibility as a public servant who held high-level security clearances during her time in Congress.

“I am a patriot,” Gabbard said during a televised exchange with Behar. “I love our country. I’ve dedicated nearly my entire adult life to protecting its freedom and security.”

Gabbard, a military veteran who served in Iraq and Kuwait and was a member of the House Armed Services and Homeland Security Committees, has long been a polarizing figure. Her refusal to toe party lines—whether on Syria, surveillance, or speech—has made her both admired and vilified across the political spectrum.

But for Gabbard, the line was crossed when personal attacks went unchecked on one of America’s most prominent talk shows. Her $50 million lawsuit seeks to establish that even daytime TV has limits when it comes to defamation.

Joe Rogan’s Take: The Media Is Finally Being Challenged

Rogan, whose podcast regularly tops global charts and influences millions, didn’t mince words in his critique. He not only supported Gabbard’s lawsuit but gleefully dissected what he views as The View’s dangerous cocktail of celebrity, bias, and carelessness.

“This is the roast that the mainstream media deserved,” Rogan said. “It’s not commentary—it’s character assassination dressed up with studio lighting.”

The podcaster described Gabbard’s legal response as a “well-thought-out takedown,” contrasting it with what he sees as the hosts’ shallow understanding of the issues they comment on. He specifically ridiculed Behar and Goldberg, describing their approach to political dialogue as “rabies-infested hot takes” that substitute volume for veracity.

“If you average out The View hosts, they’re among the dumbest people on television,” Rogan quipped. “It’s Thanksgiving dinner arguments, but with sponsors.”

Ideological Echo Chambers and Accountability

Rogan’s deeper criticism wasn’t just aimed at The View‘s content but at what he described as an “ideological bubble” that shields media personalities from consequences. The podcast host argued that the media ecosystem has long relied on narrative control without fear of legal or reputational backlash.

“Make wild claims on national TV, fine. But don’t be shocked when someone brings lawyers and receipts,” he warned.

Gabbard, according to Rogan, is doing what many in politics fear: transforming media drama into courtroom fact-checking. He portrayed her not as petty, but principled—someone who’s challenging the idea that defamation is just part of the job for public figures.

The lawsuit may signal a turning point. For years, television personalities have walked a fine line between commentary and defamation, often blurring the two with impunity. Now, Gabbard’s legal team is putting that privilege to the test.

More Than a Public Spat—A Cultural Reckoning

The defamation case also raises broader concerns about the media’s role in a hyperpolarized environment. Rogan and others argue that the press, once a safeguard for truth, has become entangled in partisan warfare—abandoning objectivity in favor of applause lines and outrage algorithms.

Gabbard, for her part, insists this fight is bigger than her.

“This is not about politics,” she said. “It’s about principle. It’s about truth.”

The lawsuit underscores a growing demand for accountability, not just from elected officials but from those who shape public discourse daily. Whether you view Gabbard as a principled outsider or a political opportunist, her courtroom challenge is poised to test the boundaries of what commentators can legally say about public figures without evidence.

And Rogan, whose platform has become a haven for unfiltered conversations, sees this moment as more than a personal feud—it’s a cultural litmus test.

“This isn’t about being left or right,” Rogan said. “It’s about whether you can get on TV, slander someone, and walk away like it was nothing.”

The Stakes Ahead

If Gabbard’s lawsuit succeeds, it could open the floodgates for more legal challenges to televised defamation—redefining how networks vet their commentary. If it fails, it may further solidify the precedent that “opinion” can serve as a shield for virtually any statement, no matter how damaging or untrue.

For now, The View has yet to issue a formal legal response. But the tension is already changing the tone of political commentary—and drawing new lines in a battle over truth, media accountability, and the law.

As Gabbard’s $50 million complaint moves forward, one thing is clear: this isn’t just courtroom drama. It’s a showdown over the power—and limits—of the national conversation.