When does CIA review the party for influencing the transition & purpose of groups intent on altering fundamental understanding of law?

How would efforts be exhibited by foreign actors in addition to their own national security issues?90's progress was made by party members who sought to undercut economic rights of citizens through government-absent standard legal response by gov officials at different level. With federal leaks due to, not... show more How would efforts be exhibited by foreign actors in addition to their own national security issues?90's progress was made by party members who sought to undercut economic rights of citizens through government-absent standard legal response by gov officials at different level. With federal leaks due to, not limited, to issues like Ames, the interests of a government shift are not quashed because of limited discovery of different interests turned illegal. It causes the question of American stability--how unstable becomes international invitation to folly and rarely a means to revert or guarantee waning legal? When multiple leaks, how would the party acquire the means to quash known political rivals who never would have had private interests available to those with (hostile) different interests? One or 2, when become dependent on the intentional flaws that serve as a basis for subversion regardless of intention. How would a real (traitor) person(s) serve as subversion by merely not fully comprehending the responsibilities of their roles? By hiding "mistakes", causes potential adversaries to view instability, potential hostility, or inattention to a standard of former agreements. Goals and agenda absent standard rule that offer problems contribute to success of subversion. Not all gov emoyees belong in gov.https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/...
0