By Plenary Sessions: Mart Helme

The speaking style is highly combative, dramatic, and insistent, employing strong emotional appeals and provocative language (e.g., "pervert convention," "slaves," "fifth column"). Opponents are criticized both personally and politically, being called "half-measure men" and their actions "a half-step," as the speaker favors resolute solutions.

The rhetorical style is extremely combative, accusatory, and insistent, employing strong and emotional expressions (e.g., "childish talk," "skin merchant," "corporate coup d'état"). The speaker often uses rhetorical questions and connects various events (the drone, the airport, Ust-Luga) into a narrative of government incompetence and cover-up. The objective is to appeal to the public through their sense of security and justice, highlighting the government's incapacity.

The style is critical and questioning, employing a rhetorical question to underscore the gravity of the situation. The discourse is formal and focuses on procedural details, dramatically contrasting the "success story" and "election fraud." The tone is urgent and demands clarity regarding the true nature of e-elections.

The rhetorical style is highly combative, accusatory, and emotional, employing sharp and intense expressions such as "criminally" and "political mumbo-jumbo." The appeals are directed toward responsibility and logic, demanding the engagement of critical thought. Emotional weight is achieved by presenting examples of specific crimes.

The rhetorical style is urgent, critical, and confrontational, employing strong phrases such as "a very serious alarm signal" and "in a catastrophically bad situation." The appeals are primarily logical (referencing traffic congestion and shortages of supplies), but delivered with high intensity, demanding specific accountability. The speaker also utilizes a historical and internal security framework ("fifth column") in the context of the plundering of Sinimäed.

The rhetoric is highly combative, accusatory, and insistent, employing powerful moral appeals ("What moral right do you have?"). Sharp language is utilized, branding the opposing side's arguments as demagoguery and the government's procedural methods as "banana republic" practices. Emphasis is placed on logical fallacies and the impossibility of due process to justify the demand for halting the debate.

The rhetorical style is extremely combative, emotional, and accusatory, employing sharp language to characterize the government and its supporters ("gang," "robbers," "rats"). The speaker utilizes powerful emotional appeals, highlighting the disgraceful plight of the elderly and the state's corrupt handling of public funds. Personal attacks are also deployed, specifically referencing a "repeat drunk driver" working in the office of the Speaker of the Riigikogu.