The guest in the "Interview" with host Ivo Nikodimov was the chairman of ITN Toshko Yordanov.
Were you disappointed that the president awarded the third term to the APS, and not to you, as he did in another case?
No, of course. The presidential institution has the right to award the third term to whoever it deems fit. I can joke that the term was not awarded in the parking lot of a food chain and marked, but that's a joke. No party inside is favored in such a situation, so this is a normal procedure.
There is speculation that the head of state may leave the presidency and join the party battle in the elections, if Rumen Radev makes such a decision, do you see an opponent or partner in his person?
A lot depends on how the elections themselves will develop. Now there are also many questions. First, how should I say, on the one hand, everyone has the right to participate in political life. On the other hand, since you were elected president and swore to be president, you were hardly elected and swore to be president in order to use the presidential institution as a springboard to a political career in parliament. Because President Radev was one of the people who claimed that the cabinet should resign. And if we assume that this was said by the presidential institution standing on the sidelines, it's one thing, but if we say that it was said by a person who wanted to provoke elections so that he could appear in them, it becomes a bit... How can I put it mildly? Not very fair play. It all comes down to morality. Everyone has the right to act as they want. I don't judge people. Especially in politics, consequences come, albeit with a delay, but they do come.
However, in the elections he would be your competitor, how will that affect ITN?
In elections, new people or new parties always appear. This is not a problem and should not be a problem for any party. Ultimately, political life is not static. Sometimes it moves forward, sometimes 26 steps back. So the emergence of new political figures is a normal process and thank God that it exists, because otherwise we would be in a severe totalitarian state in which there was one party and there was no political life at all in elections. The question is who will present themselves how.
And now what - will we elect a prime minister acting for the charlatans? From the one who said that they are charlatans.
In your opinion, is there a person who is suitable for prime minister?
This is the most disgusting thing that the PP-DB did, touching the Constitution, because 90% of everything they touched fell from it in the Constitutional Court. The consequences are now falling on the heads of everyone, on our entire society. "The House Book" is absolute nonsense, because in the other version, where we had a normal Constitution, we would not have this crisis now.
In fact, the self-proclaimed experts have committed the greatest legal stupidity is the right word in our recent history, which has consequences for our entire society. And this is a fact.
The general bill for changes to the Electoral Commission includes your idea for new machines - scanning devices for paper ballots, why do you propose that this technology replace the current machines?
A lot of people talk about how these are changes in 12 without 5, 12 without 6, 12 without 10. It was submitted in February, it was adopted on first reading. There were working groups. There were conversations with experts. What is the benefit of them? In elections, the biggest falsifications, which BNT revealed by the way, are made in the sectional election commissions, when the protocols are written and the votes are counted. That is, the human factor is what taints the elections.
Where is the benefit? First, they eliminate the human factor, because the sectional commission does not count ballots and does not write protocols. You remove the human factor - you have no counting of ballots and invalid ballots.
You eliminate 12,000 sections where the elections can be tampered with and smeared. It is with these machines that you cannot have invalid ballots.
However, what will decide the elections - technology or the political debate before them, will people understand what you, the politicians, are proposing to get out of this spiral of elections and short governments?
Elections are won by political debate. The machines are what should guarantee trust in the final result.
The problem over the past few years has been the extreme hatred that the liberal formations PP-DB, "Vazrazhdane" of the parties against each other.
You angered the PP-DB by refusing to support the changes to the NSO Law, which take away the security of deputies, why didn't you vote "For" these changes?
Look - it's very simple. Where were the PP-DB when they were together with Peevski and changing the Constitution?
To rape an entire hall just because you want to clear your guilty conscience, because you worked for a year with the same people whose security you want to take away just like that, that's stupid. Really.