By Months: Kalle Grünthal
Total Months: 18
Fully Profiled: 18
10.2025
13 Speeches
The rhetorical style is highly combative, accusatory, and dramatic, employing emotional appeals by linking the car tax to Soviet communist policy and forced collectivization. The speaker addresses the Minister of Finance directly, asking pointed questions and offering him ironic recognition. The style is formal, but the substance is sharply confrontational.
09.2025
45 Speeches
The speaker employs an extremely confrontational and combative style, using highly emotional language and resorting to personal attacks (e.g., gifting a smoked pig's head to the Speaker of the Riigikogu, or labeling a journalist a police collaborator). He issues direct challenges for debates (to the minister) and utilizes powerful ideological terminology ("digital concentration camp," "totalitarianism"). He criticizes opponents for making decisions "based on feelings" and draws on historical comparisons (the Novgorod Veche).
06.2025
40 Speeches
The speaking style is highly combative, dramatic, and forceful, utilizing strong emotional and historical appeals. He compares the government's actions to the Gestapo, the NKVD, and the Stasi, referencing the Soviet era and stressing the absence of independent decision-making power (Moscow vs. Brussels). He blends detailed legal arguments (e.g., the failure to transpose a directive) with sharp personal attacks and rhetorical questions to underscore the gravity of the situation ("What is to be done?" and "a revolution must be made").
04.2025
24 Speeches
The rhetorical style is combative, sharp, and critical, employing strong and emotional language aimed at the coalition ("servilely groveling," "cruel-faced," "brutality"). The speaker blends legal argumentation (references to laws and sections) with populist appeals to "the people," and demands that coalition deputies take responsibility and feel shame. He frequently uses rhetorical questions and direct challenges to the presenters, demanding short and clear answers.
03.2025
35 Speeches
The rhetorical style is sharp, confrontational, and emotionally charged, employing strong expressions to describe the government's inaction (e.g., "spits in the face," "mania grandiosa"). The speaker often poses rhetorical questions and demands that opponents prove their erudition, accusing them of playing political games and telling fairy tales. He uses comparisons drawn from everyday life (cleaner, driver) and strong metaphors (pyramid scheme, the king is naked).
02.2025
27 Speeches
The rhetorical style is extremely combative, confrontational, and accusatory, employing strong personal attacks like "dictator," "maffia," and "liar." The speaker blends legal and procedural arguments (citing specific sections) with emotional appeals, accusing the government of suffering from a massive "cancer" of lies. He also criticizes opponents for their appearance and behavior, for instance, referring to one rapporteur as a "little flower."
01.2025
21 Speeches
The speaking style is extremely combative, provocative, and often sarcastic, employing strong emotional language ("intolerable injustice," "rats in the granary," "Estonian banana republic," "What a farce of a bill"). The speaker utilizes personal anecdotes (such as the rating survey in Järva County) and rhetorical traps ("Why don't you want the people of Estonia to have better health?"). The speaker is blunt and unafraid to launch personal attacks (e.g., accusing Hussar of creating a "circus").
12.2024
37 Speeches
The language used is highly confrontational, emotional, and insistent, often employing extreme and accusatory phrases (such as "wearing the dunce cap," "state criminal mafia," and "fake doctors"). Dramatic analogies are utilized (the protective mother bear, the drunk driver in a ditch), and there is a strong appeal to morality and a sense of threat, balancing this with technical details and legal arguments.
11.2024
39 Speeches
The style is predominantly combative, dramatic, and insistent, utilizing strong emotional appeals and figurative expressions (e.g., "tactical nuclear bomb," "Estonia's crown jewel," "repairing a pocket watch with a sledgehammer"). The speaker often poses rhetorical questions and accusations, being direct with opponents and occasionally sarcastic (e.g., references to Toomas Kivimägi's voting skill). The final address contains a direct appeal to the people (a general strike) as the last legal means.
10.2024
39 Speeches
The speaker's style is predominantly confrontational, aggressive, and personal, especially directed at Finance Minister Jürgen Ligi, whom he accuses of lying, ignorance, and narcissistic personality disorder. He employs highly charged emotional language ("smelling of corruption," "a globalist cog," "unconstitutional activity"), as well as populist and ironic techniques (showing a screw, ridiculing the concept of social gender).
09.2024
21 Speeches
The rhetorical style is sharp, confrontational, and emotional, particularly when directed at the session chairman and the ministers. It employs strong accusations (corrupt, malicious intent, incitement to war, chatbot of an authoritarian regime) and frequently appeals both to legal logic and national sentiment (referencing traditional footwear and the kannel). The speaker uses numerous rhetorical questions and direct challenges, accusing the opposing side of gross violation of the law.
07.2024
12 Speeches
The rhetorical style is highly combative, dramatic, and cautionary, employing strong historical parallels (Stalinism, forced collectivization) and moral condemnation. The speaker addresses the "people of Estonia" directly and issues veiled warnings to coalition members about the possibility of political violence (referencing the shootings of Trump and the Slovak Prime Minister).
06.2024
25 Speeches
The rhetorical style is combative, accusatory, and forceful, employing strong emotional language (e.g., referring to parliament as a "farce") and accusing the government of "Stalinist destruction policy." The speaker often uses simple yet powerful analogies and narratives (e.g., Peeter Poligon, the sniper) to underscore the seriousness of the threats.
05.2024
32 Speeches
The speaker’s style is combative, sharp, and insistent, combining detailed legal arguments with emotional and provocative language. He/She frequently uses rhetorical questions to call into question the honesty and competence of opponents, and accuses the leadership of the Riigikogu (Estonian Parliament) of employing "steamroller tactics" and violating the law.
04.2024
53 Speeches
The rhetorical style is highly combative, accusatory, and urgent, especially when communicating with the presiding officer and members of the government. Many rhetorical questions are employed ("How is this possible?") alongside strong accusations of lawbreaking and deceit. Legal argumentation is often counterbalanced by emotional outrage, for example, calling Kaja Kallas a "genius" for destroying the nation's economy.
03.2024
26 Speeches
The rhetorical style is extremely combative, accusatory, and features personal attacks (e.g., "Sandbox Barbie," "you are being insolent," "waffling"). Dramatic and emotional language is employed (economic war, the fist of the deep state, nauseating rhetoric). In procedural matters, the tone is formal and detailed, demanding strict adherence to rules and objectivity from the presiding officer.
02.2024
23 Speeches
The tone is predominantly confrontational, accusatory, and aggressive, featuring sharp personal attacks and accusations of lying (e.g., directed at the minister). Strong emotional comparisons are employed (comparing the prosecutor’s office to the NKVD, comparing a colleague to those who carried out deportations), and the violation of procedural rules is repeatedly stressed. Historical references (Joseph Goebbels) are used to elaborate on propaganda theory.
01.2024
84 Speeches
The style is predominantly combative, dramatic, and sarcastic, especially directed at Prime Minister Kaja Kallas, whom the author ironically refers to as "dearly beloved" and the "War Princess." The rhetoric employs strong emotional appeals, linking the government's actions to Stalinist forced collectivization and 700 years of servitude, while simultaneously urging the public to support strikes and resistance. Accusations of lying and manipulating facts are frequently central to the discourse.