Mark Paoletta raised a chilling alarm about the potential consequences of a Kamala Harris administration on Thursday’s WarRoom, focusing mainly on fears of radical judicial and political control reminiscent of Venezuela’s authoritarian practices.

“The radicalism of Kamala Harris’s early appointments, including Tim Walz, represents a troubling shift toward extreme leftist policies,” Paoletta asserts.

According to Paoletta, the radical shift in U.S. politics could mirror the Venezuelan model of judicial manipulation, a scenario that should be taken very seriously by American voters.

Walz, who is known for his ties to Communist China, extreme leftist views, and controversial handling of civil unrest in Minneapolis, is seen by Paoletta as emblematic of Harris’s broader alignment with the radical left. He warns that such appointments are not merely symbolic but signals a deeper, potentially dangerous transformation in U.S. governance.

He suggests that Walz’s tenure might be a precursor to including even more radical figures in key administrative positions, such as Cory Bush, Jamal Bowman, Ilhan Omar, and Rashida Tlaib. This could result in significant policy changes and an aggressive push for leftist agendas that might threaten democratic norms.

A particularly striking aspect of Paoletta’s analysis is his comparison of potential future actions by a Harris administration with the Venezuelan model of judicial control. He warns that if Democrats gain control, they might attempt to manipulate or even dismantle the Supreme Court in ways similar to the actions taken by former Venezuelan leader Hugo Chávez. Paoletta cites the Venezuelan experience as a dire warning: "Hugo Chávez’s packing of the Supreme Court with loyalists allowed him to rule with minimal checks on his power. This is exactly the kind of threat we face if the left’s radical agenda succeeds here.”

Paoletta’s concerns revolve around the idea that a potential Harris administration could emulate Venezuela’s approach by undermining judicial independence to ensure compliance with radical policies. This includes replacing Supreme Court justices or altering the Court’s jurisdiction to secure a political rubber stamp on government actions. Such moves could erode constitutional protections and curtail freedoms, marking a significant departure from democratic norms.

In light of these concerns, Paoletta urges Americans to remain vigilant and proactive. He emphasizes the importance of electoral participation and public engagement in holding politicians accountable. “The best way to counter this threat is through active civic engagement. Voters must ensure they are informed and involved in the democratic process to safeguard against these radical shifts,” Paoletta advises.

To combat the potential overreach, Paoletta suggests several actions:

Vigilant Voting: Stay informed about candidates’ policies and their potential impact on judicial independence.

Public Advocacy: Engage in advocacy efforts to uphold constitutional norms and resist radical changes.

Support for Constitutional Protections: Support organizations and initiatives that defend judicial independence and civil liberties.

As Paoletta exposes, learning from historical precedents like Venezuela and remaining engaged in the democratic process, Americans can work to prevent such authoritarian shifts and preserve the principles of democracy and rule of law.

For more on Paoletta’s ideas, watch the full WarRoom segment on Thursday: