By Plenary Sessions: Helle-Moonika Helme
Total Sessions: 132
Fully Profiled: 132
2025-10-15
The 15th Riigikogu, 6th Session, Information Hour
The rhetorical style is highly combative, dramatic, and accusatory, employing strong emotional appeals and sharp contrasts (e.g., 400 million for the Ministry of Climate versus 105 ERSOs). Direct personal attacks are used, along with accusations of the government's corrupt and bungling governance. The tone is ironic and critical, stressing that the government has "totally failed."
2025-10-13
15th Riigikogu, 6th Session, Plenary Sitting
The rhetorical style is sharp, skeptical, and challenging, using direct questions to cast doubt on the minister's prudence and the justification of the decisions. The speaker refers to earlier offensive remarks regarding the VAT on food, creating an emotional contrast. He concludes the question with a direct accusation of a lack of caution.
2025-10-08
The 15th Riigikogu, 6th Session, Plenary Sitting
The rhetorical style is highly combative, critical, and ironic, employing strong juxtapositions (past success versus current failure). The speaker relies both on concrete data (the debt burden) and emotional appeals (health concerns, food availability). Sarcasm and the quoting of opponents (such as Jürgen Ligi) are utilized to underscore the government's inaction and incompetence.
2025-10-07
The 15th Riigikogu, 6th Session, Plenary Sitting
The rhetorical style is sharply aggressive, sarcastic, and confrontational, employing strong emotional contrasts (generosity vs. despair). The speaker uses personal attacks against the minister, accusing him of cognitive dissonance, megalomania, and memory loss ("passion kills memory"). Data is used to support emotional arguments, demonstrating the invalidity of the government's claims.
2025-10-06
The 15th Riigikogu, 6th Session, Plenary Sitting
The style is demanding, persistent, and confrontational, focusing on extracting a concrete answer. The speaker employs direct questions and rhetorical contrast, referencing the minister's previous admission of ignorance. The appeal is directed both at logic (administrative procedure) and the expectations of the public ("to the entire Estonian people").
2025-09-24
Fifteenth Riigikogu, sixth sitting, plenary sitting.
The rhetorical style is critical, skeptical, and demanding, utilizing irony (the Berlin opera versus Häädemeeste) to highlight the project's failures. Numerous rhetorical questions are employed to cast doubt on the project's economic and security rationale. The tone is formal, yet it includes an emotional appeal ("The Estonian people would like to know").
2025-09-24
15th Estonian Parliament, 6th sitting, press briefing
The rhetorical style is highly combative, accusatory, and emotional, utilizing strong hyperbole and negative imagery (e.g., North Korean news broadcasts, absurd ideological drivel, bog dystopias). The speaker presents logical arguments (budget figures) mixed with emotional appeals, calling into question the government's moral authority and legitimacy. The tone is extremely critical and urgent.
2025-09-15
15th Riigikogu, 6th sitting, plenary sitting
The rhetorical style is direct, critical, and interrogative, often employing rhetorical questions to challenge the government's actions ("Why did you do that?"). Strong and slightly emotional expressions are used (e.g., "to hit with full force," "relegated to the role of the underdog") to emphasize injustice and the negative consequences of the government's policies.
2025-09-10
15th Riigikogu, 6th sitting, plenary session
The rhetorical style is highly combative, critical, and demanding, employing strong emotional language and irony to characterize the government's actions. Quotes from historical figures are utilized ("I am not coming down from here; burn me, house and all!") alongside rhetorical questions to highlight absurd situations and demand accountability. The tone is confrontational, and the objective is to compel the opponent to publicly address sensitive issues.
2025-09-10
15th Riigikogu, 6th sitting, press briefing
The rhetorical style is combative, critical, and emotionally charged, focusing on generating fear and stress within society. It employs personal attacks against ministers, often labeling them as foul-mouthed or incompetent, and accuses the opposing party of "gaslighting." The speaker leans heavily on emotional appeals and hypothetical negative scenarios (emigration, destruction of the gene pool).
2025-09-09
15th Riigikogu, 6th sitting, plenary session.
The rhetorical style is sharply confrontational and accusatory, employing emotional imagery ("rats in the pantry") and hyperbole (mandatory service for women). The speaker quotes classical sources and demands strict factual accuracy regarding procedural issues, ready to produce official protocols (the transcript). The tone is generally admonishing and demanding.
2025-09-08
15th Riigikogu, 6th sitting, plenary session
The rhetorical style is concerned and straightforward, emphasizing the suffering and devastation experienced by the producers. A rhetorical question is employed ("Is there a plan... or will we again be told to fend for ourselves?") to sharply criticize the state's inaction. The tone is primarily logical and problem-focused, but also includes an emotional appeal for the protection of the suffering producers.
2025-09-04
15th Riigikogu, extraordinary session of the Riigikogu
The style is predominantly formal and procedural, but it includes criticism and ironic remarks aimed at the government's activities, particularly concerning how the agenda is drawn up. Strong expressions are employed (e.g., "categorical imperative"), and public concerns are highlighted (e.g., school closures, imported prisoners). The criticism is frequently aimed at the lack of substantive responses during information sessions, urging ministers to provide meaningful answers rather than relying on boilerplate phrases.
2025-06-16
XV Riigikogu, V Session, Plenary Sitting
The rhetorical style is formal and interrogative, addressing the audience as "Dear Chairman" and "Dear Presenter." The speaker focuses on logical and procedural questions to clarify the rationale behind the schedule and its long-term consequences, while avoiding emotional appeals.
2025-06-12
15th Riigikogu, 5th session, plenary sitting
The rhetorical style is extremely combative, sarcastic, and accusatory, repeatedly employing the phrase "pure trolling" to characterize the government's actions. The speaker utilizes emotional appeals, referencing instances of rape and murder, and charges the minister with "seething self-justification" and using childish expressions. He/She employs irony to ridicule the opposing side’s arguments, citing the phrase "a state-beneficial educational project" as an example.
2025-06-11
15th Riigikogu, 5th session, plenary sitting
The rhetorical style is accusatory and confrontational, focusing on the opposing side's alleged dishonesty and concealment ('they didn't dare tell people this'). Historical recollection and rhetorical questions are employed ('do we now have more security, or rather less?'), in order to cast doubt on the consequences of the proposed bill.
2025-06-09
15th Riigikogu, 5th session, plenary session
The rhetorical style is highly combative, accusatory, and deeply ironic, employing powerful emotional appeals and direct personal attacks (for instance, labeling the minister a political activist and a party soldier). Sharp expressions are repeatedly used (e.g., "cognitive dissonance," "rubber stamp," "crackpots"), and the destructive nature of the government's actions is strongly emphasized. The speaker presents their views through questions and rhetorical exclamations, focusing on ideological and moral condemnation rather than neutral data analysis.
2025-06-04
15th Riigikogu, 5th session, plenary session
The rhetorical style is critical and combative, employing strong moral and ethical appeals, for example, by comparing compensation payments to buying indigenous land for glass beads. Rhetorical questions and hypothetical cases (such as the advertising of COVID vaccines) are repeatedly used to criticize the prevailing procedural logic. The tone is accusatory and demands explanations.
2025-06-04
15th Riigikogu, 5th sitting, press briefing
The rhetorical style is highly aggressive, critical, and insistent, accusing the Prime Minister of presenting half-truths and outright lies. The speaker balances emotional claims ("absolutely insane," "the worst performer") with logical arguments, presenting a detailed example of a two-child family's budget and demanding specific, concrete calculations. He uses the analogy of the "snake eating its tail" to describe the relationship between inflation and wage increases.
2025-06-02
15th Riigikogu, Fifth Session, Plenary Session
The rhetorical style is sharp, confrontational, and highly critical, employing strong accusations (such as amplifying state propaganda). Rhetorical questions and irony are utilized to highlight the discrepancies in the government’s stated priorities. Although factual data is provided (budget figures, research findings), the overall tone remains emotionally charged, particularly when discussing e-elections and priority setting.
2025-05-21
Fifteenth Riigikogu, Fifth Session, Plenary Session.
The style is highly combative, accusatory, and ironic, employing ridicule aimed at government rhetoric (e.g., "slavery is freedom" and the supposed benefits of the VAT increase for low-income earners). The speaker uses strong emotional appeals and levels direct accusations regarding the government's incompetence and dishonesty, posing numerous rhetorical questions ("Do you even understand what you are saying?").
2025-05-19
15th Riigikogu, Fifth Session, Plenary Session.
The speaker adopts a highly combative, emotional, and critical style, employing strong, damning phrases like "bungling actions," "foolish and incompetent state governance," and "Putin’s delight." He draws on personal experiences from Southern Estonia and uses rhetorical questions to underscore the public's disappointment and despair, while dismissing the opposing side's arguments as mere "blithe prattle."
2025-05-14
15th Riigikogu, 5th sitting, plenary session
The tone is predominantly combative, confrontational, and sarcastic, particularly when criticizing opponents (liberals, the coalition). The speaker employs strong emotional appeals and colorful metaphors, labeling draft legislation a "Trojan horse" and the CO2 market "selling air." They frequently use personal examples (as a private forest owner) and rhetorical questions, accusing opponents of fearmongering and manipulation.
2025-05-14
15th Riigikogu, fifth sitting, information briefing.
The rhetorical style is extremely combative, accusatory, and emotionally charged, employing powerful appeals to the sense of justice. The speaker details the abuse and crimes (rape, beating residents to death) that took place in care homes to underscore the gravity of the situation. The tone is confrontational, accusing the minister of avoiding responsibility and obfuscating the issue.
2025-05-08
15th Riigikogu, 5th session, plenary sitting
The style is critical and confrontational, presenting direct questions to the Minister regarding responsibility for hypothetical future events. The speaker employs logical, consequence-based argumentation, linking the Minister's choice to a potential threat to freedom of speech. The tone is serious and cautionary.
2025-05-07
15th Riigikogu, 5th session, plenary sitting
The rhetorical style is highly combative, critical, and accusatory, often employing emotional appeals to highlight the hardships faced by the populace (e.g., emigration, expensive electricity). Sharp accusations are leveled at the government (arrogance, security scaremongering), and complex issues are simplified by contrasting the current situation with the notion that "it was easy and cheap before."
2025-05-06
15th Riigikogu, 5th session, plenary session
The rhetorical style is highly combative, accusatory, and urgent, employing strong emotional and judgmental expressions ("bungling governance," "craving for dictatorship," "stupidities"). Rhetorical questions are often used to call into question the authority of the ministers and the session chair, as well as the constitutionality of their actions.
2025-05-05
15th Riigikogu, 5th session, plenary sitting
The rhetorical style is skeptical and at times combative, employing irony and figurative expressions (e.g., "the lion and the lamb together on a green meadow") when describing the relationship between the Competition Authority and businesses. Sharp questions are posed, suggesting potential dishonesty or political bias on the part of the government and the authorities. The tone is critical and logical, focusing on the exposure of political motives.
2025-04-21
15th Riigikogu, 5th session, plenary session
The rhetorical style is forceful, critical, and confrontational, employing highly charged emotional phrases such as "security threat," "deceit and lies," and "a rotten state of affairs." The speaker uses rhetorical questions and references the existence of a deep state to underscore the magnitude of the systemic crisis. The tone is formal, but the content is extremely suspicious and accusatory.
2025-04-17
15th Estonian Parliament, 5th session, plenary session
The rhetorical style is highly combative, critical, and accusatory, employing strong emotional expressions (e.g., "arrogant and cynical governance"). Colloquial language is used ("the well-fed do not understand the hungry"), along with rhetorical questions, to emphasize the divide between the ruling elite and ordinary people. The appeals are primarily emotional and value-based, contrasting the selfishness of the elite with the suffering of the populace.
2025-04-16
15th Estonian Parliament, 5th session, plenary session
The rhetorical style is combative, critical, and skeptical, employing emotionally charged and derogatory expressions such as "green hysteria," "green racket," and "pure nonsense." Hypothetical scenarios (like the EU finally coming to its senses) and rhetorical questions are used to test the ideological dependence and consistency of opponents.
2025-04-16
15th Riigikogu, 5th sitting, press briefing
The tone is extremely combative, accusatory, and emotional, using strong and degrading epithets directed at the government ("incompetent, arrogant, and cynical bunglers"). The speaker repeatedly uses rhetorical questions ("Seriously?") and intense expressions ("a blatant crime against humanity," "trampling on the experiences of loved ones"), strongly appealing to emotions and demanding accountability. The style is more emotional and accusatory than logical or data-driven.
2025-04-15
Fifteenth Riigikogu, Fifth Session, Plenary Session.
The rhetorical style is demanding and confrontational, especially concerning issues of social injustice, employing emotional appeals (for example, the helplessness of the elderly and the legal system turning its back). Regarding transport issues, the style is critical and suspicious, casting doubt on the motives of coalition politicians and asking whose interests they are actually serving. The speaker asks direct questions and refuses to comply with the minister's wish to avoid certain topics.
2025-04-14
15th Riigikogu, 5th session, plenary sitting
The style of the speech is extremely combative, critical, and accusatory, often employing sharp and emotional phrases ("green madness," "corrupt plan," "liberal terror," "monkey business"). The speaker uses numerous rhetorical questions and vivid metaphors (Pippi's spunk, a hundred cane strokes, ivory tower, potholes) to underscore the government's arrogance and dishonesty. There is a refusal to address the Prime Minister using his formal title, emphasizing his lack of legitimacy.
2025-03-25
15th Riigikogu, 5th session, plenary session
The speaker’s rhetorical style is highly confrontational, accusatory, and emotionally charged, repeatedly making references to the "oiling of Putin’s war machine." Hypothetical questions are employed to underscore political injustice and the previous attempts to sweep the issue under the rug. The speech concludes with a direct accusation that the minister is ridiculing Estonia as a state governed by the rule of law, demonstrating the high intensity of the attack.
2025-03-24
15th Riigikogu, 5th session, plenary session.
The rhetorical style is confrontational and critical, employing strong judgments (e.g., "unscientific green transition narrative," "under the shadow of dreadful wind turbines"). The appeals are a blend of economic logic (the absence of a market economy) and a value-based emphasis, pitting business sector revenue against family policy.
2025-03-20
15th Riigikogu, 5th session, plenary session
The rhetorical style is combative, ideological, and forceful, employing strong labeling ("globalists," "radical thugs") and accusing opponents of hypocrisy. Both logical arguments (the impact of taxes on the standard of living) and emotional appeals (the violation of women's safety) are utilized. The speaker addresses not only the colleagues seated in the chamber but also the online audience.
2025-03-19
15th Riigikogu, 5th session, plenary session
The rhetorical style is sharply critical and combative, employing strong accusations of hypocrisy and injustice ("Petty thieves hang from the gallows, while the big crooks continue to ride around in carriages.") The speaker uses emotional appeals to highlight the skewed nature of the state's priorities and the scale of corruption. The tone is urgent, particularly concerning security and the reallocation of resources.
2025-03-19
15th Riigikogu, 5th sitting, press briefing.
The style is highly combative, accusatory, and insistent, posing direct questions to the Prime Minister ("What are you afraid of?"). The rhetoric relies both on logical arguments (constitutional order, approval ratings) and emotional accusations of corruption and unethical conduct. Sharply critical language is employed, labeling the government’s actions as unconstitutional and thoroughly steeped in corruption.
2025-03-18
Fifteenth Riigikogu, fifth sitting, plenary session
The rhetorical style is highly combative, critical, and accusatory, using strong language such as "immigration pump" and "Bolt's lobbying." The speaker relies primarily on value-based and procedural criticism (e.g., constitutional violations) and directly accuses the government of lobbying and political bullying. The tone is formal, yet urgent and concerned about the state of democracy.
2025-03-17
15th Riigikogu, 5th session, plenary sitting
The style is combative, ironic, and critical, using anecdotal comparisons (like the official and the cramped apartment) to ridicule the government's actions. The speaker employs both emotional appeals (concern for children and teachers) and logical arguments (the inefficiency of the management structure) to emphasize just how illogical the ministry's activities are. This approach heightens indignation and accuses the opposing side of using bureaucratic flowery language.
2025-03-13
15th Riigikogu, 5th sitting, plenary session
The rhetorical style is highly accusatory, emotional, and forceful, employing personal stories (miscarriage, an inconsolable woman) and moral condemnation. Dramatic language is used, accusing the opposing side of crimes against humanity and corruption. The speaker presents their views in the form of questions, seeking confirmation from their interlocutor ("Dear Varro!").
2025-03-12
15th Riigikogu, Fifth Session, Plenary Session
The rhetorical style is sharp, accusatory, and confrontational, expressing great astonishment and indignation over the opposing side's actions. Strong emotional language is employed (e.g., "childish and arrogant justification"), along with direct rhetorical questions ("Who are you protecting, or what are you hiding?"), in order to call the opposing party's motives into question.
2025-03-12
The 15th Riigikogu, fifth sitting, information briefing.
The style is extremely combative, accusatory, and focused on scandal, utilizing strong emotional expressions ("in screaming contradiction," "a mire of lawlessness," "a hormone-fueled teenager"). Sarcasm is employed (the four seasons are to blame) alongside rhetorical questions ("who are you fooling?"). The logical appeal is based on an itemized list of taxes and the citation of constitutional authority.
2025-03-10
15th Riigikogu, 5th session, plenary session
The rhetorical style is explanatory, reminiscent, and insistent, emphasizing the objective of the discussion and the necessity of forming an investigative commission. The speaker employs logical argumentation to substantiate the need for an inquiry by referencing specific financial details (unpaid maintenance and property damage). The tone is formal and geared toward persuasion.
2025-02-27
15th Riigikogu, 5th session, plenary sitting
The rhetorical style is extremely combative, accusatory, and pressing, employing emotional and moral appeals regarding issues like corruption, fraud, and potential imprisonment. The speaker employs sharp personal attacks and sarcasm, accusing opponents of "gaslighting" and "desperate lying." The tone is formal, but the content is aggressively confrontational, emphasizing that the Parliament (Riigikogu) is not a kindergarten.
2025-02-26
15th Riigikogu, 5th session, plenary session
The rhetorical style is sharp, critical, and confrontational, particularly when criticizing the government's actions and accusing them of hypocrisy ("their deeds contradict their words"). Numerous rhetorical questions are employed to cast doubt on the opponents' motives, such as the Reform Party's alleged desire to take permanent control of science funding. While appeals are made to the responsibility and logic of politicians, emotional intensity is also employed when addressing the topic of attacking scientists.
2025-02-26
15th Riigikogu, 5th session, press briefing
The rhetorical style is highly aggressive, accusatory, and urgent, employing sharp phrases such as "sweeping things under the rug," "creative accounting," and "fraudulent schemes." The speaker relies heavily on emotional appeals, highlighting the loss of public confidence and the government's unethical behavior. Logical arguments are deployed to dismantle the government's assertions (for instance, the alleged low cost of wind energy), effectively accusing the administration of spinning a "fairy tale."
2025-02-25
15th Riigikogu, 5th session, plenary session
The rhetorical style is highly combative, accusatory, and emotional, employing strong labels against opponents, such as "globalists," "woke activists," "a pack of lunatics," and "enemies of the Estonian state." The tone is alarmist, framing political disagreements as existential threats to the independence and rule of law of the Republic of Estonia.
2025-02-12
15th Riigikogu, 5th session, plenary session
The rhetorical style is highly combative and confrontational, employing direct attacks (e.g., "bad prime minister") and accusations that the government's actions have become "blatantly corrupt." Numerous rhetorical questions are used to emphasize the government's failure, and the opponent's arguments are referred to as "childish."
2025-02-12
15th Riigikogu, 5th sitting, information briefing
The style is sharp, critical, and incisive, utilizing strong emotional and judgmental expressions (e.g., "ideological suicide," "irrational subsidizing"). Rhetorical questions and contrasts (USA vs. EU/Estonia) are employed to highlight the available choices. The speaker accuses the opposing side of cheap demagoguery and failure, emphasizing a logical appeal through the lens of economic damage.
2025-02-11
15th Riigikogu, 5th session, plenary sitting
The style of the address is direct and confrontational, kicking off with a call to talk about "real life and the real world." Ideologically charged and resolute language is employed, posing questions that require the ministry to clearly align itself with new international value standards.
2025-01-29
15th Estonian Parliament, 5th sitting, information briefing
The rhetoric is sharp, accusatory, and combative, employing powerful rhetorical questions to cast doubt on the government's motives. The tone expresses concern for consumers (electricity prices are skyrocketing) and directly accuses corruption (referencing plastic bags and the preferential treatment of major Reform Party donors). The speaker utilizes both logical argumentation (technical details) and emotional appeals (wasting taxpayer money).
2025-01-27
15th Riigikogu, 5th session, plenary session
The rhetorical style is highly combative, accusatory, and ironic, employing strong historical comparisons (Lysenkoism) to discredit the opponents' viewpoints. The tone is ideological and emotional, blending political prediction (a drop in support) with the expression of personal pity toward opponents who are forced to convince themselves of things that are untrue.
2025-01-22
15th Estonian Parliament, 5th session, plenary session.
The rhetorical style is highly combative, accusatory, and emotionally charged, employing sharp language such as "ridiculous [salaries]" and "a blatant robbery scheme." The speaker relies heavily on emotional appeals and a specific example—a mother of four children—to illustrate the negative impact of the taxes. The tone is formally respectful ("Mr. Chairman!"), but sharply confrontational in substance.
2025-01-22
15th Riigikogu, 5th session, information briefing
The rhetorical style is highly combative, passionate, and confrontational, employing strongly negative evaluations of the opponents' policies ("nonsensical arrangement," "abnormal," "false ideologies"). The speaker relies on emotional and ideological appeals, emphasizing that their positions are the only views held by "normally thinking" people. Direct questions are posed to the Prime Minister to demand a reassessment of the policy.
2024-12-11
15th Riigikogu, 4th session, plenary session
The rhetorical style is highly combative, urgent, and emotional, employing sharp criticism and dramatic examples (e.g., the Russification of Estonian children). Strong contrasts are used (Estonian needs vs. foreign aid) alongside historical parallels ("internatsid"). The speech concludes with a physical protest, tearing the draft bill to shreds to emphasize that its proper place is "in the trash can."
2024-12-09
15th Riigikogu, 4th sitting, plenary sitting
The rhetorical style is concerned, skeptical, and cautionary, emphasizing a clear threat to Estonia's mineral resources and expressing deep distrust regarding the government's actions. Strong declarations of conviction ("there is no doubt whatsoever") are employed, and a direct rhetorical question is put to the minister ("Don't you see?"), which signals a confrontational and alarm-raising tone.
2024-12-04
15th Estonian Parliament, 4th session, plenary sitting
The rhetorical style is sharply aggressive and emotional, repeatedly accusing opponents of demagoguery, stupidity, and being out of touch with reality. Strong value judgments and loaded language are employed, such as "vile international demagoguery" and "crime." Appeals are aimed both at correcting statistical arguments and at national sentiments (the threat of sacrificing the education of Estonian children).
2024-12-04
15th Riigikogu, 4th sitting, press briefing
The style is sharp, critical, and penetrating, especially when commenting on the government's actions. The speaker employs powerful emotional appeals, highlighting the threat to patient safety (the slip of a surgeon's hand) and labeling the reduction of the Health Insurance Fund's budget as "theft." They pose rhetorical questions to underscore the government's subservience to the EU and demand accountability from specific ministers.
2024-12-03
15th Riigikogu, 4th session, plenary sitting
The rhetorical style is extremely combative, emotional, and accusatory, employing strong moral appeals and scare tactics (e.g., "desecrated bodies will remain on your conscience"). Opponents are directly accused of lying, corruption, and abetting perverts, suggesting a conscious, deliberate course of action. The speaker uses dramatic language to emphasize the urgency and danger of the issue.
2024-11-20
15th Riigikogu, 4th session, plenary sitting
The rhetoric is highly combative, emotional, and urgent, employing strong and negative metaphors (e.g., "defiling the constitution," "dancing with a gas scarf"). The appeal is directed primarily at national values and the future of children, stressing the security threat. The speaker aggressively demands answers and transparency from the opposing side, particularly concerning commission votes.
2024-11-20
15th Estonian Parliament, 4th sitting, press briefing.
The rhetorical style is extremely sharp, accusatory, and confrontational, employing powerful historical parallels (the Brezhnev era, the Phosphate War) to criticize the government. Emotional language is utilized ("fiddling the books," "languishing in poverty"), along with direct personal attacks against the prime minister (referencing his "delusions"). The preference is for narratives (the Ukrainian businessman, the plastic bag scandal) and accusations rather than the presentation of detailed evidence.
2024-11-13
15th Riigikogu, 4th session, plenary session.
The rhetorical style is highly combative, critical, and demanding, especially when describing opponents' policies, employing strong negative epithets (e.g., "infantile," "utterly stupid," "ridiculous"). The speaker insists on sticking to the topic ("Let's talk about money, let's not spin a yarn") and uses emotional appeals (families, mothers, security) to underscore their positions. They also make procedural demands, such as putting amendments up for a vote.
2024-11-12
15th Riigikogu, 4th session, plenary session
The rhetorical style is sharp, critical, and confrontational, employing heavily loaded terms such as "climate lie" and "ideological infantilism." The appeals are a blend of logical criticism (Tallinn-centricity) and value-based condemnation (socialist terminology), with questions posed directly to the presenter. The tone is anxious and accusatory, emphasizing the intimidation of people.
2024-11-11
15th Riigikogu, 4th session, plenary session
The rhetorical style is passionate, confrontational, and forceful, employing strong emotional appeals (references to unborn children, Father’s Day, a poem) while accusing opponents of lying. The speaker balances legal and financial argumentation with sharp social criticism aimed at government policy. He/She poses direct questions to colleagues and also addresses the viewers watching the screen.
2024-11-07
15th Parliament, 4th sitting, plenary session
The rhetorical style is highly combative, critical, and accusatory, employing strong emotional appeals that highlight people's suffering and the government's perceived malice. Irony is utilized ("Thank you, Party and Government!") alongside direct accusations of hypocrisy and the threat of corruption (Rail Baltic). The tone is insistent, urging the coalition to find the courage and support the draft law in order to demonstrate genuine concern.
2024-11-06
15th Riigikogu, 4th session, plenary sitting
The rhetorical style is confrontational, provocative, and sarcastic, utilizing direct questions aimed at the opponent and personal attacks. The tone is particularly sharp when accusing a government member of lying about tax increases, referencing the "title of liar" and a confession made during a live broadcast on ERR. The appeals combine logical political criticism (the security aspect) with strong emotional and ethical attacks.
2024-11-06
15th Estonian Parliament, 4th sitting, information briefing
The rhetorical style is predominantly combative, accusatory, and insistent, utilizing strong emotional appeals and direct accusations against the opposing side ("Why are you lying to the people of Estonia?"). Sharp rhetorical questions and imperatives are employed to emphasize the integrity of one's own position and the danger inherent in the opposing side's solution. A regional reference (the Võro language) is used at the beginning of the speech to create goodwill.
2024-11-05
Fifteenth Riigikogu, fourth session, plenary session
The speaker’s style is highly confrontational and critical, employing strongly charged language such as “madness,” “ideological zealots,” “absurd,” and “hypocritical.” They utilize both logical arguments (loss of competitiveness, the low cost of fossil fuels) and personal attacks (referencing the prime minister’s source of knowledge and the spouse’s business dealings with Russia).
2024-11-04
15th Riigikogu, 4th session, plenary sitting
The rhetorical style is highly combative and accusatory, employing strong emotional phrases such as "family demolition projects" and "climate hysteria." The speaker frames their position as a pointed rhetorical question directed at the minister, focusing on moral and value-based arguments concerning the policy's consequences.
2024-10-23
15th Riigikogu, 4th sitting, plenary session
The rhetorical style is passionate, confrontational, and critical, employing strong emotional appeals (referencing the dignity of women and the decline of the ministerial institution). Sharp accusations are leveled (lies, coupled with arrogant and haughty self-justification) and absurd examples (cat litter in the toilet) are used to illustrate ideological threats. The overall tone is one of dissatisfaction and accusation, particularly concerning the quality of the ministers' responses.
2024-10-22
15th Riigikogu, 4th session, plenary session
The tone is confrontational and sharply critical, employing emotional and accusatory language, such as accusing banks of "skimming the cream off the top" and dismissing regulations as "ideological mumbo-jumbo." The speaker picks up on the personal theme ("kitchen") introduced by the minister and calls the minister's competence into question. The argument is grounded in defending the principles of the free market and drawing comparisons with regional competitors.
2024-10-21
15th Riigikogu, 4th session, plenary sitting
The rhetorical style is predominantly confrontational, emotional, and often sarcastic, employing strong expressions (e.g., "don't lie," "smeared with filth"). The speaker focuses on exposing the government's alleged incompetence and secrecy, favoring personal and procedural attacks in addition to logical arguments. He repeatedly demands specific answers, accusing the ministers of speaking in circles and concealing the truth.
2024-10-16
15th Riigikogu, 4th session, plenary sitting
The style of the speech is highly confrontational, accusatory, and emotional, employing sharp phrases such as "you're talking nonsense" and "you are lying." In addition to the political criticism, significant attention is paid to the decorum and procedures of the debate, demanding that the minister refrain from using expressions like "harping" or "nagging," given that the minister is the one accountable before the Riigikogu (Parliament). Both logical arguments are used (by citing agreements) and emotional appeals (by referencing cultural figures and mothers without health insurance).
2024-10-10
Fifteenth Riigikogu, Fourth sitting, plenary session.
The rhetorical style is forceful and highly emotional, employing powerful appeals via specific incidents that have shocked the public to underscore the danger posed by the proposed bill. The tone is sharply critical, sometimes accusatory, toward the officials, asking, "What on earth are these officials thinking?" Both logical argumentation (citing sections of the law) and emotional argumentation (focusing on the child's unfortunate situation) are utilized.
2024-10-07
15th Estonian Parliament, 4th session, plenary session
The rhetorical style is sharply critical and at times emotional, using strong expressions such as "pure monopolism," "utopian project," and "money laundering." Appeals are made both to logic (economic and strategic importance) and to emotions (traffic fatalities and poor road maintenance). The overall tone is urgent and demanding, emphasizing that the state must intervene where it is necessary to stand up for the people.
2024-09-25
15th Riigikogu, 4th sitting, plenary session
The rhetorical style is confrontational and emotional, employing sharp metaphors ("a nation of fools," "the devil is in the details") to criticize the government. Numerous rhetorical questions are used to emphasize the practical and moral consequences of social issues, often by referencing traditional values ("our grandfathers are turning over in their graves").
2024-09-25
15th Riigikogu, 4th sitting, press briefing
The tone is sharp, accusatory, and insistent, employing sarcasm (e.g., "tax festival," "obtuse") and an ironic anecdote (the gypsy and the horse) to ridicule the government's economic promises. It utilizes a legal framework and poses rhetorical questions to highlight the danger of the government's actions to the constitutional order.
2024-09-18
15th Estonian Parliament, 4th sitting, plenary session
The rhetorical style is critical, skeptical, and direct, questioning the bill's justification based on public interest and stating that "this talk is worth absolutely nothing." Both logical arguments (the cost of network construction) and emotional appeals (the surrender of Estonian territory) are employed. The speaker attempts to make the complex piece of legislation understandable to the common person by using simplified explanations.
2024-09-16
The 15th Riigikogu, 4th session, plenary sitting.
The style is extremely combative, emotional, and forceful, employing heavily charged and polemical language (e.g., "child-hating government," "class-hatred agenda," "insane actions"). Emphasis is placed on national ruin and injustice, appealing to the listeners' emotions rather than detailed data. The speaker uses irony and sharp accusations to highlight the immorality and instability of the government's actions.
2024-09-11
Fifteenth Riigikogu, fourth session, plenary session
The style is predominantly combative, critical, and at times ironic, especially when addressing the government. Strong emotional language is employed, labeling the government's activities as "anti-business," "deviant," and "criminal" from the standpoint of how the state should function. Logical arguments (cost savings, long-term perspective) are interwoven with moral and ethical issues (the hiring of consultants, the abuse of social welfare benefits).
2024-09-11
15th Estonian Parliament, 4th session, press briefing.
The style is sharp, confrontational, and accusatory, utilizing strong emotional terms such as "stole" and "robbery." The speaker is sarcastic, particularly when criticizing the ambiguity of the prime minister's responses and presenting the finance minister's quote regarding rising prices. They expect the respondent to possess a broad scope of knowledge and criticize the vagueness of the answers.
2024-09-09
15th Riigikogu, 4th session, plenary session
The style is combative, critical, and often accusatory, utilizing strong expressions (e.g., "stolen," "rubbish," "hurrah-optimism"). Both emotional appeals (personal financial loss, the Russification of children) and logical arguments (loss of export revenue) are employed. Rhetorical questions and historical parallels (Moscow vs. Brussels) are often used to criticize ideological opponents.
2024-07-29
15th Riigikogu, Riigikogu extraordinary session.
The rhetorical style is highly aggressive, accusatory, and confrontational. Emotionally charged language is employed (e.g., "family blood business," "security threat"), and direct, demanding questions are posed. The tone is skeptical and requires the opponent to take concrete and detailed accountability, for instance, by asking them to list ten of Putin's most brutal crimes.
2024-07-29
15th Riigikogu, extraordinary session of the Riigikogu
The style is extremely confrontational, accusatory, and emotional, employing strong language such as "criminal," "persecutes," and "tortures." The speaker appeals directly to the Estonian people, pitting the government's actions against the interests of the nation, and repeatedly utilizes rhetorical questions and irony. He/She criticizes the vague responses of opponents, while simultaneously highlighting the government's own failure to provide concrete data.
2024-07-22
15th Riigikogu, Riigikogu's extraordinary session.
The rhetorical style is highly combative, accusatory, and cynical, employing strong emotional language (e.g., "outrages," "battered," "destructive decisions"). Rhetorical questions are frequently used, along with direct attacks on the opponent's motives and integrity, demanding accountability. The tone is extremely confrontational and distrustful ("we can now read lips very well").
2024-07-15
15th Riigikogu, Extraordinary session of the Riigikogu
The rhetorical style is sharply critical and combative, particularly regarding the competence of opponents, who are accused of failing to clear the bar. To reinforce their stance, they employ both logical arguments (such as constitutional inconsistency and disproportionate burden) and references to public opinion (citing 80% opposition).
2024-06-12
15th Estonian Parliament, 3rd session, plenary session.
The rhetorical style is direct and formal, focusing on procedural explanation and requesting a vote. The tone is businesslike and logical, emphasizing the radical impact of the change on the content. Emotional appeals are absent.
2024-06-05
15th Riigikogu, 3rd session, plenary sitting
The rhetorical style is very combative, emotional, and accusatory, addressing the Estonian people directly and also the colleagues present in the hall. Strong expressions are used (e.g., "to skin someone alive," "a knife in the back"), and the negative impact of the tax on freedom and livelihood is emphasized. The government is accused of lying, cynicism, and neglect, as well as using the fear of war for propaganda purposes.
2024-06-05
15th Riigikogu, 3rd sitting, information briefing
The rhetorical style is critical, combative, and demanding, particularly when addressing the government and the session chairman. Strong language is employed (e.g., "secret meeting," "a very serious problem," "absolutely false accusations"), and the public's right to know is stressed. The speaker is direct and categorically refutes the accusations made by the opposition.
2024-06-04
15th Riigikogu, third session, plenary sitting
The rhetorical style in the political context is combative and accusatory, leveling direct accusations of lying against the Reform Party. On topics concerning policy and legislation, the style is inquisitive and detailed, focusing on logical arguments and data (4.4 billion) regarding risk analysis and operational continuity. The overall tone is critical and demanding, especially toward the presenters, who are required to provide concrete answers.
2024-06-03
Fifteenth Riigikogu, third session, plenary sitting.
The rhetorical style is highly aggressive, accusatory, and brazen, employing intense expressions ("shamelessly and brazenly"). Rhetorical questions are used to cast doubt on the minister's moral judgment, and parallels are drawn with previous scandals (such as Kaja Kallas's Eastern transport scandal) to highlight political impunity. The tone is emotional and moralizing rather than dry and logical.
2024-05-29
15th Estonian Parliament, 3rd session, information briefing
The rhetorical style is highly combative and alarmist, particularly on security issues, where direct and imminent danger is emphasized ("it's no longer a question of if, but when [war comes]"). Strong emotional appeals and personal attacks are used against the Prime Minister (accusing her of abandoning the country and seeking out "foreign uncles"). The speaker employs irony and historical hyperbole (beard taxes, bald head taxes) to criticize the government's financial policy.
2024-05-28
15th Riigikogu, third session, plenary session
The rhetorical style is passionate, sharply accusatory, and highly emotional, repeatedly invoking the theme of the Estonian people being deceived and the government lying. Strong metaphors are employed ("in firm, strangling hands") along with a direct appeal to voters to withhold support from the coalition. The tone is overwhelmingly confrontational and features personal attacks (e.g., targeting Kaja Kallas and Jürgen Ligi).
2024-05-27
Fifteenth Riigikogu, third session, plenary session
The rhetorical style is confrontational, critical, and emotional, employing sharp language and figurative, sometimes aggressive expressions (e.g., "to cripple," "I will kill one tiny potential human being"). The speaker frequently uses rhetorical questions and demands direct "yes or no" answers, framing political issues within a moral context. Irony is also utilized, describing the minister's responses as imagery containing an "element of violence."
2024-05-15
15th Riigikogu, 3rd session, plenary session
The rhetorical style is highly combative, emotional, and often hyperbolic, employing strongly negative expressions such as "insane ideology," "brutally polluting nature," and "meat grinders." Appeals are made for the protection of nature and local communities, citing examples of injured birds. In the later phase of the session, the style becomes repetitive and procedural, focusing on demanding votes.
2024-05-15
15th Riigikogu, 3rd session, press briefing
The rhetorical style is highly combative, accusatory, and forceful, highlighting the perilous state of the nation in terms of demographics and the economy. Both emotional appeals (the public's despondency and anguish) and statistical data are used to substantiate claims of government incompetence. The tone is confrontational, demanding the prime minister's resignation and accusing him of a gross violation of the constitutional order.
2024-05-13
15th Estonian Parliament, 3rd session, plenary session
The tone is serious, concerned, and accusatory, stressing that this is not a joke, but a matter of grave concern. Logical argumentation is employed (specifically highlighting factual errors) with the goal of generating fear and uncertainty among the public regarding security agencies. The speaker uses strong phrases such as "to miss the mark," "to mess up incompetently," and "to fabricate."
2024-05-08
15th Riigikogu, 3rd session, plenary session.
The style is direct and focuses on procedural requirements, while remaining courteous toward the presiding officer ("gracious Chair"). Initially, slight frustration is expressed due to technical issues (the console is described as "hard and unresponsive"). The speaker also notes the strong buzzing noise prevailing in the hall, which indicates a desire to restore order.
2024-05-08
15th Riigikogu, 3rd sitting, information briefing
The rhetorical style is extremely aggressive, accusatory, and emotional, employing strong language such as "treason" and "crime." The speaker utilizes both factual data (cost figures, economic growth) and populist appeals, defending the public from government accusations and "brainwashing." The tone is ironic and critical, calling into question the competence and morality of the government.
2024-05-07
15th Riigikogu, 3rd session, plenary session
The speaker's rhetorical style is predominantly combative and passionate, especially when criticizing the government and opposing forces, employing terms like "incompetence," "unconscionably," and "underhand tactics." They utilize both emotional appeals (the conditions of musicians, the future of high culture) and logical arguments (location, cost, legislative obligations). The tone is urgent and demands immediate action.
2024-05-06
15th Riigikogu, 3rd sitting, plenary session.
The rhetorical style is extremely aggressive, accusatory, and emotional, utilizing sharp personal attacks and moralizing language (e.g., "shame," "minus 25," "a wolf in sheep's clothing"). The discourse is rather value-based and nationalistic, emphasizing the defense of the nation-state and accusing the opponent of violating the constitution. Irony and hyperbole are employed (e.g., "even any drunkard is fit to be put in front of the class") to underscore the gravity of the situation.
2024-04-30
Fifteenth Riigikogu, Third Session, Plenary Session.
The address is formal and procedural, beginning with an address to the Presiding Officer. The tone is neutral and functional, focusing on the direct application of parliamentary rules of procedure (taking a recess).
2024-04-29
15th Riigikogu, 3rd session, plenary session
The rhetoric is sharp, accusatory, and confrontational, calling into question the moral and professional competence of both the Bank of Estonia's experts and the Prime Minister. Strong emotional appeals are employed, particularly on the issue of abortion, which is labeled "the killing of children." The tone is ironic and skeptical, referring to the forecasts as "wishful thinking" and "detached from reality."
2024-04-17
15th Riigikogu, 3rd session, plenary sitting
The emphasis is confrontational, critical, and insistent, utilizing strong emotional appeals (e.g., the illegitimacy of the government, the destruction of society). The style is formal, yet it includes sharp accusations of disregarding the constitution and repeatedly references the lack of public trust (nearly 40% of people do not trust the elections). The speaker uses repetition to underscore the substantive importance of their proposed amendments and the impropriety of the committee’s decisions.
2024-04-16
15th Riigikogu, 3rd sitting, plenary session
The tone is predominantly combative, critical, and skeptical, describing the minister’s report as "pretty talk" or "an evasion of reality." It leverages strong emotional appeals, particularly concerning the appreciation of Estonian language and culture and threats to internal security. The rhetoric relies on stark contrasts (Estonian families vs. Ukrainian families; beautiful words vs. lack of funding) and includes sharp accusations regarding the government's priorities.
2024-04-15
Fifteenth Riigikogu, third session, plenary session
The rhetorical style is highly combative and confrontational, employing sharp personal attacks against the minister, including drawing comparisons to Kaja Kallas and asserting that the minister’s salary is undeserved. The speaker blends formal procedural issues with heavily emotional evaluations and accuses the opposition of nitpicking over trivial matters.
2024-04-10
15th Estonian Parliament, 3rd session, plenary session
The rhetorical style is sharply aggressive and accusatory, discrediting opponents by referencing their previous extreme positions taken during the crisis. The speaker employs irony and contrasts to highlight the opposing side's inconsistency between their calls for financial austerity and their actual voting behavior. The style is emotionally charged, yet it is grounded in logical argumentation concerning procedural and economic aspects.
2024-04-08
15th Riigikogu, 3rd session, plenary sitting
The style is extremely combative and critical, employing strong emotional terminology such as "anti-family," "bungling governance," and "state racket." The appeal is primarily through logical criticism and the presentation of facts (declining birth rates, tax hikes), but the tone is personally aggressive, accusing ministers of personal offense and the government's policies of being anti-child. The speaker also criticizes the presiding officer's excessive strictness, advocating for a louder and more expressive style of parliamentary debate (citing the examples of Finland and Canada).
2024-04-03
15th Estonian Parliament, 3rd sitting, plenary session
The rhetorical style is predominantly combative, accusatory, and confrontational, especially towards the Reform Party and the co-presenters. Strong emotional appeals are employed, alongside accusations of lying, mocking, and arrogant behavior ("cackling," "outright lies"). The tone is formal yet passionate, focusing on highlighting the ethical and procedural shortcomings of the opponents.
2024-04-03
15th Riigikogu, 3rd sitting, information briefing
The rhetorical style is highly combative, accusatory, and inflammatory, employing strong emotional appeals and words such as "criminal," "bungling," and "is being stolen." The speaker contrasts the government's actions with the plight of the taxpayer, emphasizing moral outrage and the damage being inflicted upon the state. Irony is also utilized, referencing the paradoxical outcome of the "values-based deal."
2024-03-18
15th Riigikogu, 3rd sitting, plenary session
The style is sharp, critical, and accusatory, employing powerful metaphors (such as "festering sore" and "empire"). The speaker presents their arguments using rhetorical questions and stark contrasts, highlighting the injustice and political bias within the legal system. The overall tone is emotional and moralizing, rather than logical or data-driven.
2024-03-13
15th Riigikogu, 3rd session, plenary sitting.
The rhetorical style is combative and accusatory, utilizing strongly emotional and value-laden language, such as "anti-family decisions" and "the bill to pervert marriage." The speaker presents their views bluntly, combining moral criticism of the government with specific examples of rising prices for specific services.
2024-03-11
15th Estonian Parliament, 3rd session, plenary session
The rhetorical style is sharply confrontational and accusatory, employing emotional appeals (intimidation, cynicism) to criticize the government's actions. Direct rhetorical questions are posed to the prime minister ("Why are you doing this?"), and emphasis is placed on the government's alleged inconsistency and dishonesty. The tone is more emotional and accusatory than data-driven, focusing instead on the political impact on people's lives.
2024-03-06
15th Riigikogu, 3rd session, plenary session
The rhetorical style is predominantly confrontational and direct, especially when dealing with social and immigration issues. Strong accusations of hypocrisy are employed, such as the phrase "hypocrisy cubed." At the same time, they manage to remain polite and appreciative toward any minister who explains matters clearly. The style utilizes emotional appeals (indigenous rights, birds being ground up) and sharp analogies ("a broken gramophone").
2024-03-06
15th Riigikogu, 3rd session, press briefing
The rhetorical style is extremely aggressive, accusatory, and dramatic, employing strong emotional phrases such as "pure theft" and "folly." Alongside logical arguments, personal allusions are used to discredit opponents (e.g., the role of the prime minister's lawyer, citing the Barbie movie) and cultural parallels ("Fools of Fame"). The overall tone is condemnatory and cautionary.
2024-03-05
15th Estonian Parliament, 3rd sitting, plenary session
The rhetorical style is combative and sharply critical, often employing rhetorical questions and powerful metaphors ("pyramid scheme," "verbal sleight of hand"). It appeals to logic and common sense ("people of sound mind will understand"), stressing the hypocrisy and lack of substance in the opposing side's arguments. The tone is formal, yet emotionally charged.
2024-03-04
15th Riigikogu, 3rd session, plenary sitting
The rhetorical style is combative, critical, and accusatory, often employing rhetorical questions ("what world are you people living in?") and irony. Strong historical comparisons are utilized, linking the government’s coercive policies to communist and totalitarian regimes. The speaker directly accuses the government of lying (specifically regarding the abolition of the terms "mother" and "father").
2024-02-21
15th Riigikogu, 3rd session, plenary session
The rhetorical style is combative, sharp, and direct, employing strong phrases such as "mad tax policy" and labeling the opposing side's arguments as "very, very arbitrary." The speaker draws upon both emotional examples (farm bankruptcies) and logical comparisons (VAT in other countries). He actively defends his right to intervene in the debate, citing the intense discussion culture of the Finnish parliament.
2024-02-21
15th Riigikogu, 3rd sitting, information briefing
The rhetorical style is highly confrontational, accusatory, and moralizing. Direct attacks are employed against the minister's moral authority, emphasizing an emotional appeal and demanding strict adherence to the rules (the Estonian language requirement). The tone is sharp and demanding.
2024-02-19
15th Riigikogu, 3rd sitting, plenary sitting
The rhetorical style is direct, concerned, and demanding; although it begins by praising the inquiry ('very good and noble'), it quickly shifts to the specific concern: the lobbying for cannabis legalization. The speaker employs a logical appeal, referencing specialists, and concludes with a demanding question aimed at securing a firm promise from the minister.
2024-01-25
15th Riigikogu, 3rd sitting, plenary session
The rhetorical style is investigative, topic-expanding, and slightly provocative, introducing a subject into the discussion that deviates from the original focus of the draft bill. The speaker addresses the presenter personally and encouragingly ("Dear Hanah"), directing her, as a young person, to research the topic further. The argumentation relies on alleged historical facts and a logical connection to the subject of aviation fuel.
2024-01-24
15th Riigikogu, 3rd sitting, plenary session
The speaker's style is insistent and concerned, particularly on language matters, emphasizing that the situation has deteriorated and requires immediate, "more stringent measures." He employs both logical arguments (constitutional right, the effect of inflation) and impactful metaphors ("fear factor," "nudging") with the aim of steering companies toward lawful conduct. The presentation is formal, addressing both colleagues and the public.
2024-01-24
15th Riigikogu, 3rd sitting, information briefing
The rhetorical style is highly combative, accusatory, and sharp, employing strong expressions such as "war hysteria," "screwed up," and "insane talk." It utilizes the technique of mirroring the opponent's rhetoric ("I don't know what world you people live in") and rhetorical questions. Emotional appeals emphasize the negative impact on the country's reputation, investors, and the motivation of residents, often using ironic analogies (birthing machine, soda dispenser).
2024-01-22
15th Riigikogu, 3rd session, plenary sitting
The style is sharply critical and combative, employing irony and highlighting oxymorons (e.g., "freedom is slavery," "tax increases leave people with more disposable income"). The speaker utilizes powerful emotional examples (such as multi-car pile-ups and the degradation of disabled individuals) and directly connects political decisions to the deterioration of people's everyday lives. The tone is frequently sarcastic, expressing profound outrage ("I genuinely don't know whether to laugh or cry").
2024-01-18
15th Riigikogu, 3rd sitting, plenary session
The tone of the speech is formal, respectful, and appreciative toward the presenter, offering thanks for the thorough presentation. The emphasis is on a logical and questioning approach, centered on obtaining definitions for specific terminology (e.g., the value-based education gap).
2024-01-17
15th Riigikogu, 3rd sitting, plenary session
The rhetorical style is businesslike and direct, yet confrontational when necessary, particularly concerning the ambiguity of the minister's answers and the judgments made by the session chair. Logical arguments are employed (economic growth, the threat of corruption), and the relevance of the debate is actively defended, with the chair's assertion regarding the asking of questions being deemed inappropriate.
2024-01-15
15th Riigikogu, 3rd sitting, plenary session.
The speaker adopts a combative, urgent, and sharply critical tone, particularly aimed at the prime minister, whom they accuse of dismissiveness toward questions and outright dishonesty ("Read my lips!"). Emotional imagery is employed (such as giving away the store or rolling in with a tank) and irony (the "soda machine" reference) to underscore the perilous nature of the government's actions. Furthermore, the speaker utilizes direct evidence, specifically by presenting an audio clip concerning the Town Hall Square incident.
2024-01-10
15th Riigikogu, 3rd sitting, plenary session
The style is formal and analytical, particularly in the technical presentation of the draft bill, where logical argumentation is employed. Simultaneously, the speaker adopts a procedurally corrective role, intervening to ensure order in the chamber and attempting to define the extreme language ("abuse") utilized within parliament. Ultimately, the tone is persuasive and appealing, requesting support for the bill.
2024-01-10
15th Riigikogu, 3rd sitting, information briefing
The rhetorical style is highly aggressive, accusatory, and emotional, employing strong comparisons (e.g., the Soviet era) and rhetorical questions ("Do you even have any sense in your head?"). The speaker stresses the government's dishonesty and incompetence, relying on public outrage and quoting satirical remarks about the prime minister.
2024-01-08
15th Riigikogu, 3rd sitting, plenary session.
The speaker’s style is combative and forceful, utilizing strong emotional appeals regarding injustice, especially on the topic of closing rural schools and the squandering of resources. They employ sharp metaphors and harsh judgments, labeling the activities of the Ministry of Climate as "humbajumba" (mumbo-jumbo) and referring to its personnel as "voodoo specialists." The speaker sharply contrasts education with large-scale national projects, emphasizing the crucial importance of preserving Estonian identity and security.