[mjanx123]

The European countries leaderships were each put in place by its responsible CIA compartment supporting liberal candidates/parties and undermining the competition. With the current conservative US admin they are supposed to interact with they don't know what to do and likely will do nothing.

[pyuser583]

CIA is fanatical about following the State Department's foreign policy. Aside from gathering intelligence, they just take the State Department's lead.

A lot "CIA influence" isn't the CIA at all, but the US Government, usually State or DoD, projecting soft power.

I know this sounds pendantic. But whenever someone starts talking about the CIA like it's responsible for "supporting liberal candidates" - all seriousness leaves the room.

[alephnerd]

> CIA is fanatical about following the State Department's foreign policy

From past personal experience, inter-service autonomy over policymaking is tightly guarded, and arguments always end up with the NSA (advisor, not the agency) where the president essentially becomes the tiebreaker.

Under the current administration, this rivalry has gotten much more intense due to the relatively hands-off management style that has been adopted.

[igleria]

> But whenever someone starts talking about the CIA like it's responsible for "supporting liberal candidates" - all seriousness leaves the room.

Nobody likes to admit their vote (or lack of) has consequences outside their little bubble.

[kreetx]

Where would you say the "CIA influence" is the strongest, so I could see better what you mean?

I've observed that it's the messy process of democracy that has put the people in power. Sure, big countries (i.e, mostly Russia) would like to tilt governments their way, but it isn't succeeding. I can tell you though that local Facebook pages for newspapers are full of strange comments, seemingly Russian trolls (but I have no proof).