DEA Microgram and Freedom of Information

T

theblueletters

Bluelighter
Joined
Jan 11, 2006
Messages
37
Mods Feel Free To Move This Thread If Need Be
I was looking further into the Federal Depository Library System today. It's the mechanism by which the government makes federal printings available to the public at no cost.

A “government publication” is defined in the U.S. Code as “informational matter which is published as an individual document at Government expense, or as required by law” (44 U.S.C. 1901).

Reading on Wikipedia I found this section
A library may be given FDLP status via “by-law designations.” Title 44 of the U.S. Code. Any library that meets the following criteria automatically qualifies for FDLP status:
Land-grant colleges and universities (44 U.S.C. 1906)
Libraries of federal agencies, i.e. executive departments, service academies, independent agencies (44 U.S.C. 1907)
Highest appellate court of a state (44 U.S.C. 1915)
Accredited law schools (44 U.S.C. 1916)
Click to expand...
From http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_depository_library

The section in red indicated that the DEAs publication library qualifies as an FDLP and I looked a little more and found that the library in their Newark Headquarter is an FDLP.
That means that by law they are required to "provide services such as interlibrary loan and reference to selective depository libraries it serves."

Thus Legally I should be able to go to my States Regional Depository Library (Newark Public Libary)) and request all 2009 - 2011 issues of the Microgram and they should be able to get them via interlibrary loan.

If I am for some reason denied the documents then I should be able to make submit an FOIA (Freedom of Info) request as the DEA is under the executive branch. I'm concerned however that the request might be denied on the basic of the 7th of the 9 exceptions to the Act.

(7) records or information compiled for law enforcement
purposes, but only to the extent that the production of such law
enforcement records or information (A) could reasonably be expected
to interfere with enforcement proceedings, (B) would deprive a
person of a right to a fair trial or an impartial adjudication, (C)
could reasonably be expected to constitute an unwarranted invasion
of personal privacy, (D) could reasonably be expected to disclose
the identity of a confidential source, including a State, local, or
foreign agency or authority or any private institution which
furnished information on a confidential basis, and, in the case of a
record or information compiled by criminal law enforcement authority
in the course of a criminal investigation or by an agency conducting
a lawful national security intelligence investigation, information
furnished by a confidential source, (E) would disclose techniques
and procedures for law enforcement investigations or prosecutions,
or would disclose guidelines for law enforcement
Click to expand...
From Title 5 of the United States Code

Does the microgram fit this exemption? Does the fact that it was published online for several years nullify an argument for its suppression?
I'll probably request an interlibrary loan next week but I'd like to see if anyone has tried to obtain these documents previously and how they went about it and what the results were.

PLEASE NO "YOUR GONNA BE ON THEIR RADAR IF YOU DO" RESPONSES. I'm a recovering heroin addict and I don't do drugs anymore. I have nothing to hide and no reason to be afraid of the DEA.
 
Nope Wait It's Still Surpressed

- JANUARY 2010 -
- CHANGES TO MICROGRAM BULLETIN POSTING -
Starting with the January 2010 issue, Microgram Bulletin on www.dea.gov will now contain
Scheduling Updates, Safety Alerts, Selective References, Meeting Announcements,
Employment Opportunities, The Journal/Textbook Collection Exchange, and Training
Opportunities. Intelligence Alerts and Briefs will only be found in Microgram Bulletin LE
(Law Enforcement) edition.
Microgram Bulletin LE will be posted on Law Enforcement Online (LEO), www.leo.gov
(criteria for membership and applications for membership can be found at www.leo.gov/
membership_criteria.pdf and www.leo.gov/usrApp.html). LEO is a free, interactive, computercommunications service provided by the FBI. It provides an Internet accessible focal point for
electronic Sensitive But Unclassified (SBU) communication and information sharing for the
international, federal, state, local, and tribal law enforcement agencies. LEO also supports
antiterrorism, intelligence, law enforcement, criminal justice, and public safety communities
worldwide.
Those who do not meet the criteria for membership at LEO can apply for access to Microgram
Bulletin LE through the Department of Justice’s information exchange website (IDEA). Access
to IDEA will be granted only to government and scientific professionals who have a
demonstrated professional need to have access to Microgram Bulletin LE and who cannot
qualify for access to www.leo.gov. If you are requesting access to Microgram Bulletin LE
through IDEA, you will need to email your request to the Microgram Editor.
 
I have looked at microgram articles online through the Dept. of Justice website, in november of 2010 I think the last time was.. Maybe the microgram article I was reading was a year old or two, but It was available online in PDF form, I think i went to the Dept. of Justice website and then NDIC website, then read a few microgram articles in PDF form, maybe this was a back door way to do it, as NDIC is the National Drug Information Clearinghouse(maybe wrong the what the C means)lol..but it has (NDIC) the annual drug reports, Specail Drug reports and some Micorgram stuff, And this was in nov. 2010 ,way past Jan, 2010, Maybe it was pre-2010 info or something but it was not older than 2 years at that time. It was not exactly helpful as far as "getting away with anything" and was not some big secret info, anyone who does some reasearch on drugs or drug markets already knows the stuff mostly on the Microgram articles, they just have more specific to one topic info..
 
^^^The DEA is not part of the Executive branch, it is part of the Department of Justice, USDOJ website has the DEA, and NDIC ,etc.. other agencies under its Department of Justice agencies like the FBI and so on.. The CIA is part of some other more secret type branch of government as is the NSA, and variuos other alphabet named agencies most people have never and will never hear about, those are probably under the DEPT, of Homeland Security, as I think technically anything the govenment wants tp can be put under its umbrella of secret shit!!
 
^The Justice Department is within the executive branch. President appoints the Attorney General, head of the Justice Dept and also appoints the director of the DEA. He can also fire both of them. DEA is executive branch.
 
Doesn't belong in DS.

DiTM might be a better fit, even if it doesn't exactly fit into the guidelines.
 
I had approached this subject when the Microgram went LEO-only and I was basically given the same attitude found here:

- Not enough of our people read it
- No one gave a shit
 
DavisK4high247 said:
I have looked at microgram articles online through the Dept. of Justice website, in november of 2010 I think the last time was..
Click to expand...

The public is not authorized to read the entire publications as of 2010.

Maybe the microgram article I was reading was a year old or two, but It was available online in PDF form, I think i went to the Dept. of Justice website and then NDIC website, then read a few microgram articles in PDF form, maybe this was a back door way to do it, as NDIC is the National Drug Information Clearinghouse(maybe wrong the what the C means)lol..
Click to expand...

Yes, you can read them. But there is no backdoor. You are not privy to what people at LE are. You have to have some sort of clearance and credentials to read what we used to.

but it has (NDIC) the annual drug reports, Specail Drug reports and some Micorgram stuff, And this was in nov. 2010 ,way past Jan, 2010, Maybe it was pre-2010 info or something but it was not older than 2 years at that time. It was not exactly helpful as far as "getting away with anything" and was not some big secret info, anyone who does some reasearch on drugs or drug markets already knows the stuff mostly on the Microgram articles, they just have more specific to one topic info..
Click to expand...

As of Jan 2010, the public is no longer privy to what it used to be.

That information WAS useful to those of us in the know, because it allowed us to look at what they were doing and focusing on as they do to us. It gave more of a balance to the cat and mouse game. It was just a matter of knowing how to utilize that information if you were in "the game".

You could see what they were focused on, see what they considered "accomplishments", et cetera.

At the very least, it was as interesting as it was entertaining.

I formerly used the Micrograms Bulletin to see what they were focusing on, where to find things, what to avoid, et cetera. It's not that I can't do that now, but it's more difficult. And arrests and seizures by the DEA as opposed to local law enforcement agencies are almost impossible to track now. You don't see what's being confiscated at the ports, smuggling methods, et cetera. Those things do make a difference. It was like a "this is how NOT to" manual" which you could use to do those things better. Cat and mouse.

And it is an absolute breach of an open democracy for them to suddenly classify a consolidation of information. And the way they control their information now makes the operators of their site a purely propaganda wing. Which MY tax dollars pay for and that upsets me the most. Why was it okay for me to view the same information two years ago, but now I need a clearance?

In a lot of ways, it's really just a matter of principle.

You've obviously seen what they published before... and like you said, it wasn't an insane amount of information or anything that if it was a local drug bust you wouldn't be able to read about (the only thing they added were the final results of the chemicals and pictures).... that alone bothers me. Maybe it's just my background as a hax0r with a 14.4 baud dial up modem back in the day going to 2600 Club meetings and freely exchanging information. But things like that should bother anyone with natural curiosity. And it ties in to a lot of bigger things... if they are covering up such trivial things, what is the United States doing now in all it's Globe Trotting across the world.
 
All it takes is one "friendly" LEO. Surely someone knows one, ask them to apply.
 
yea what a bummer they made this LE only...it was interesting to see the seizures they were making and the ingenuity the smugglers were using to ship loads to the US. Plus being able to see the quantitative testing of things like coke and heroin seizures you could get an idea of dope in your area or if there is anything dangerous going around. i know there was one from baltimore where they found heroin caps cut with xanax.
 
Meh, only a freedom issue and not much of a practical one. You can find out FAR more about what is busted, and how, by googling. Microgram constantly had the most arbitrary shit littered around the handful of interesting reports.
 
This doesn't belong here, but I've already filed my FOIA request, though it's only been two days since I sent it off so I doubt they have even seen it yet.
 
I formerly used the Micrograms Bulletin to see what they were focusing on, where to find things, what to avoid, et cetera. It's not that I can't do that now, but it's more difficult. And arrests and seizures by the DEA as opposed to local law enforcement agencies are almost impossible to track now. You don't see what's being confiscated at the ports, smuggling methods, et cetera. Those things do make a difference. It was like a "this is how NOT to" manual" which you could use to do those things better. Cat and mouse.

And it is an absolute breach of an open democracy for them to suddenly classify a consolidation of information. And the way they control their information now makes the operators of their site a purely propaganda wing. Which MY tax dollars pay for and that upsets me the most. Why was it okay for me to view the same information two years ago, but now I need a clearance?
Click to expand...

I'm too lazy to look it up right now, but there's a thread in Legal Discussion in which the point is made that Microgram isn't covered by FOIA because of the attitude expressed in your first paragraph. I think the way the act is written, you can't use FOIA to break laws.

specifically: Title 5 of the United States Code, section 552: Exemption to the FOIA:

7. ...records or information compiled for law enforcement purposes, but only to the extent that the production of such law enforcement records or information (A) could reasonably be expected to interfere with enforcement proceedings, (B) would deprive a person of a right to a fair trial or an impartial adjudication, (C) could reasonably be expected to constitute an unwarranted invasion of personal privacy, (D) could reasonably be expected to disclose the identity of a confidential source, including a State, local, or foreign agency or authority or any private institution which furnished information on a confidential basis, and, in the case of a record or information compiled by a criminal law enforcement authority in the course of a criminal investigation or by an agency conducting a lawful national security intelligence investigation, information furnished by a confidential source, (E) would disclose techniques and procedures for law enforcement investigations or prosecutions, or would disclose guidelines for law enforcement investigations or prosecutions if such disclosure could reasonably be expected to risk circumvention of the law, or (F) could reasonably be expected to endanger the life or physical safety of any individual;[5]
Click to expand...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_of_Information_Act_(United_States)
 
It does not disclose techniques (aside from not LEO-related analytic techniques) or procedures or guidelines. It is a very dry account of what unique events they catch. These things are already available through court transcripts since these things almost invariably end up in court.

Having it blocked off creates a health hazard by not allowing people to see what they're finding in drugs. More than once we've seen phenazepam being sold on LSD-like blotter and various non-MDMA drugs as Ecstasy. I'm glad they've decided to keep the discovery of anthrax in heroin in the public account, but the other stuff is too valuable to the public as to override the importance of depriving the drug-smuggling public the meager benefit they got from learning about what got other people caught (as again, can already be learned from by reading court transcripts).
 
Yeah the 'could aid crime' excuse didn't make a ton of sense. As mentioned, the bulletin is almost completely garbage for any purposes like that. It just has a ton of random shit in it, and if there was anthrax in heroin then it's a very proper PSA just to put that out! They never put how-to's or anything practical for drug manufacturers/traffickers, I don't know how they could pretend it was a 'manual' of any sort.
 
Microgram's header:

The U. S. Attorney General has determined that the publication of this periodical is necessary in the transaction of the public business required by the Department of Justice. Information, instructions, and disclaimers are published in the January issues.
Click to expand...

Microgram segment:

INTELLIGENCE ALERT
Click to expand...

though really, I imagine that the newer ones have more pertinent stuff than the older, public-access issues. I imagine they contain material of interest to the RC market.
 
ATTENTION! THE DEA MICROGRAM IS DOWN! YOU CAN NO LONGER VIEW VERSIONS AFTER A CERTAIN YEAR...

thats the end of it...w0rd./ lol
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top