Joe Rogan Accuses Kamala Harris of “Rewriting History” Over Canceled Interview and Election Claims

Podcast host Joe Rogan has once again ignited political debate after publicly challenging Vice President Kamala Harris over what he described as “a rewriting of history” in her new book and public remarks. In a recent episode of The Joe Rogan Experience, the comedian and commentator accused Harris of distorting past events and taking credit for ideas she did not originate. He also sought to clarify a long-circulated rumor that he had rejected an interview with her during the campaign season, saying the opposite was true — that her team had backed out due to fears of an unscripted conversation.

Rogan began by criticizing Harris for claiming in her book that the most recent presidential election was the “closest race of the 21st century.” He called the statement “a lie,” pointing out that the 2000 contest between George W. Bush and Al Gore was far tighter, ultimately decided by a fraction of a percentage point and a Supreme Court decision. “She keeps saying it wasn’t a mandate,” Rogan said. “But he won both the popular vote and the Electoral College. That’s a mandate.” Rogan and his guest agreed that Harris’s framing seemed designed to minimize the scale of her opponent’s victory and to keep supporters energized by suggesting the race had been a near tie.

The podcast host then accused Harris of taking credit for Donald Trump’s proposal to eliminate taxes on service workers’ tips, a policy she reportedly mentioned in her book as part of her economic platform. “That was clearly his idea,” Rogan said. “She copied it once it became popular.” He called the move a textbook political tactic — claiming ownership of ideas that resonate with voters while deflecting blame when policies fail. “It’s what politicians do,” he said. “Take credit when things go right, stay quiet when they don’t, and pretend nothing ever happened.”

The conversation then turned to the controversy surrounding the canceled interview between Rogan and Harris. In her book, Harris suggested she was eager to appear on Rogan’s show but that scheduling and security conflicts prevented it. Rogan rejected that version outright, saying Harris’s staff had never committed to the appearance and instead fabricated excuses to avoid an unpredictable, unscripted exchange. “They never wanted to do it,” Rogan said. “They told people I took a personal day. That’s not true. I told them I wasn’t available during Trump’s visit because he was recording here. I even said I’d do it later, at midnight if needed.”

According to Rogan, Harris’s team requested a more controlled format — shorter, scripted, and filmed elsewhere — which he refused. “They didn’t say the word scripted,” he recalled, “but they said there were things she didn’t want to talk about.” He added that Harris’s campaign seemed uncomfortable with his show’s long-form style, which typically runs for two to three hours and often veers into unplanned territory. “You can’t fake your way through three hours,” Rogan said. “I’d find out who you are.”

Harris’s book offers a different account. She wrote that she and Rogan had initially agreed to record in Detroit, but that he later asked her to come to Texas, where his studio is located. She claimed time constraints in the final weeks of the campaign made travel impossible, particularly in key swing states. Rogan disputed this, pointing out that he has never recorded a podcast outside his own studio and that all previous political guests — including Bernie Sanders, Tulsi Gabbard, and Robert F. Kennedy Jr. — had appeared in person in either Los Angeles or Austin. “If she really wanted to do it, she could’ve done it like everyone else,” Rogan said.

Critics argue that the episode reveals a broader problem with political media strategy. “Harris’s team wanted control over the message,” said media analyst Sean Delaney. “Rogan represents the opposite — an uncontrolled, long-form format that forces authenticity.” Others see the clash as symbolic of the growing tension between traditional political communications and the decentralized, conversational style that dominates new media.

Rogan suggested that Harris’s reluctance stemmed from fear of spontaneous questions about controversial topics, such as immigration or border policy. “All I have to do is ask, ‘Why is the border open?’ and we could talk for three hours,” he said. “That’s what they didn’t want.” He claimed her team used security concerns as a pretext to withdraw after learning that Secret Service agents were already stationed at his Texas studio during Trump’s visit. “It wasn’t about safety,” Rogan said. “It was about control.”

As the podcast clip spread online, Harris’s defenders pushed back, saying her team’s caution was understandable given the highly polarized environment and Rogan’s reputation for hosting provocative guests. However, even some Democratic commentators acknowledged that skipping the interview may have been a missed opportunity. “Rogan’s audience is enormous — tens of millions of mostly young, male listeners,” said political strategist Clara Reynolds. “Reaching them could have broadened her appeal. Not doing the show made her look insulated.”

Rogan’s critique didn’t stop there. He accused Harris of tailoring her political identity to whichever audience she faces, calling her a “political chameleon” who “says whatever people want to hear.” According to Rogan, her shifting rhetoric between progressive and moderate positions reveals a lack of core conviction. “Her politics change with the applause,” he said. “When the crowd changes, so do her beliefs.”

In the final section of her book, Harris wrote that despite her staff’s reservations, she personally wanted to appear on Rogan’s show because it would have reached a large, younger audience. “I wanted to reach those guys who might not otherwise hear from me,” she wrote. Rogan dismissed that explanation as disingenuous. “If she really wanted to, she would’ve shown up,” he said. “Blaming your team is the oldest trick in the book.”

Elon Musk weighed in online, agreeing with Rogan’s broader point that political figures are too scripted. “Americans want authenticity,” Musk wrote on X. “Too many leaders sound like PR departments.”

For Rogan, the episode reinforces his reputation as an anti-establishment interviewer who resists conventional talking points. For Harris, it adds another complication to an already difficult narrative — one that questions her willingness to engage outside carefully managed spaces. Whether the story resonates beyond the podcast world remains to be seen, but it underscores a larger shift in how political credibility is built. In an age when millions tune into long-form, unfiltered discussions, the ability to face tough questions without a script may matter as much as any policy proposal.

As Rogan put it bluntly, “People don’t want perfect answers. They want the truth, even if it’s messy.”