"TPM" asked some "Experts" about Bush "National Security Directive!' Here's what they said:

[KoKo]

xperts: Prez Directive Nothing New
By Laura McGann - May 29, 2007, 3:31 PM

When a presidential directive appeared on the White House’s Web site on May 9, seemingly expanding the president's powers after a catastrophic attack, readers began emailing us asking why there had been no uproar in the media or amongst civil liberties groups.

The consensus amongst experts seems to be that the directive, aimed at establishing "continuity of government" after a major disaster, is not new nor does the policy seem to expand executive power.

In fact, Mike German, the policy counsel to the ACLU’s Washington office told me that an executive continuity plan actually might “not be that bad of an idea.”

Executive power expert, NYU law professor David Golove, also sent me an email saying the directive didn’t appear to be a power grab.

National Security Presidential Directive 51 or Homeland Security Presidential Directive 20 is posted here. Have a look.

Presidential directives outlining how the executive branch will remain intact in the event of an emergency have been around since the Cold War. The directive posted this month is the first to be made public, to the best of German’s recollection. (A description of Clinton’s continuity directive is available here.) German called the release a positive sign, but said he urges the release of all previous directives so we can get a real sense of what has changed.

MORE with COMMENTS by posters at...........

http://www.tpmmuckraker.com/archives/003310.php

[mod mom]

1. BUT here is a great point listed under comments there:

This was posted under comments and makes an astute point:

The secret annexes to the executive order which are incorporated into the executive order by reference is not more of the same. Secret executive orders by annex? Very Rovian, and much in the old tradition of alito when he was a WH/Justice lawyer.
Hand Counted Paper Ballots, counted at the precinct level w full public witness!

[KoKo]

2. Yes....I was counting on posters there to keep pointing out what's in that

Directive. The "ho hum..." from the Experts is worrysome. Every time the Experts "ho hum" the Bushies more of our Freedoms are lost and our Constitution with it.

I was glad to see Josh on this...even thought it's quietly....it's better than the rest of the Media has done.

[sicksicksick_N_tired]

3. Well, that "executive continuity plan" scares the shit right out of me!!!

I got the heebie jeebies, recently, when my bro (NG) was activated by 'homeland security' strictly for purposes of securing a plan of action in a major chemical/biological/dirty nuke event. Normally, I would feel comforted by such activities; but, damn, these days, I am convinced our country is at cliff's edge with totalitarianism.

[whistle]

4. ACLU counsel Mike German says, plan “not [...] that bad of an idea.”

...with a name like "German", I suppose that attitude is not unexpected!:wtf: Words like annexation bother me a lot

[KoKo]

5. ,,,

[dragonlady]

6. It all depends on who the executive is

The power can be the same, but how would Bill Clinton use it, versus how the Bush regime would use it?

[KoKo]

7. ....