By Plenary Sessions: Martin Helme

The rhetorical style is highly combative, accusatory, and pointed, employing powerful emotional appeals regarding the government's brazenness and deceit. The speaker utilizes an unconventional maneuver in the Riigikogu chamber (playing an audio clip from the Reform Party's campaign advertisement) and reiterates pointed rhetorical questions to underscore the administration's lack of integrity. The minister in question is branded a "tankist" (fall guy/scapegoat), signaling a personal attack and an escalation of the conflict.

The rhetorical style is highly combative, accusatory, and alarmist, employing strong emotional phrases such as "green terror," "climate panic," and the "manifesto of death culture." Logical economic arguments (interest rate hikes, CO2 impact) are interwoven with ideological attacks, accusing opponents of dismantling the market economy and going along with "stupidity." The speaker uses rhetorical questions and contrasts official analyses (e.g., warm weather raised the price by 0.7%) with hidden, yet catastrophic consequences.

The rhetorical style is highly combative, alarming, and ideologically charged, utilizing strong terms such as "green terror," "green insanity," and "lying straight to your face." The speaker balances economic arguments (billion-dollar costs) with emotional appeals regarding free society and enslavement. The tone is urgent and demands a radical change in direction.

The speaker's style is very combative, accusatory, and insistent, utilizing strong phrases such as "grossly violated," "brutally lied to," and "the death of parliamentary democracy." He balances emotional appeals concerning the demise of democracy with detailed procedural and technical arguments. The speech is formal but includes sharp characterizations of the opponents' actions ("liberal regime," "liberal activists").

The rhetorical style is extremely concise, formal, and functional. The purpose of the address is purely procedural (requesting a recess), and there are no emotional or substantive arguments present.

The style is critical, procedural, and demanding, employing direct questions to pinpoint responsibility ('who is actually to blame?'). The speaker combines legal arguments (constitutional violation) with practical, economic analysis (the cost of poles versus four-lane roads).

The rhetorical style is formal and centers on the candidate's presentation, yet it incorporates strong elements that appeal directly to character traits. An emotional, regional reference—"Viru blood does not tremble!"—is employed to underscore the candidate's dignity and loyalty.

The speaker’s style is extremely combative, accusatory, and emotionally charged, utilizing strong metaphors ("butiigike") and hyperbole (Estonia is a banana republic, heads must roll). The tone is urgent and apocalyptic, focusing on the moral decay and corruption of the system, rather than on dry political analysis.

The rhetorical style is sharply aggressive, emotional, and accusatory, employing strong language to label opponents ("pathological liar," "liberals are the new fascists," "to stir up trouble"). The speaker appeals to national survival and traditional values, linking the opponents' actions to historical totalitarian patterns (communism, the Reds in power). The opposing side is often accused of failing to answer substantive questions and engaging in manipulation.