By Plenary Sessions: Anti Poolamets

The rhetorical style is sharply critical and combative, employing strong metaphors ("grey zone," "elephant in the room") and historical analogies (a regression to the 80s). The speaker poses challenging rhetorical questions designed to undermine the minister's logic and inaction ("So, maybe we should just let all the crooks police themselves?"). The tone is urgent and emotional, particularly when addressing the language question.

The style is highly combative, emotional, and provocative, employing heavily loaded and condemnatory language ("woo-woo science," "are being brainwashed," "mutilation of children"). The speaker utilizes sarcasm (e.g., concerning the minister's title and gender) and leans heavily on historical fears and Soviet-era falsehoods to underscore the gravity of the situation. The rhetoric appeals to moral panic and demands immediate action.

The rhetorical style is combative and accusatory, employing strong emotional appeals and hyperbole (for example, describing e-elections as "caricatured" and "pathetic"). The speaker uses comparisons (USA, Trump, Black Lives Matter) to test the consistency of opponents and demands internationally recognized consensus sources (OSCE) as the factual basis. The tone is more polemical than conciliatory.

The style is urgent and combative, emphasizing the necessity of speed and referencing historical failures ("delays, letting things slide"). Both logical arguments are employed (e.g., procurements are delayed) and emotional appeals (Eldorado, throwing money into the sea). The speaker utilizes historical examples (Kiek in de Kök, the cancellation of the 1939 treaties) and quotes experts (General Sõrskõi, James Acuna) to bolster their position.

The speaker employs a highly combative, critical, and accusatory style, utilizing strong emotional language ("astounding," "the mystical 100 million," "brutal censorship"). They use irony (a comparison to seven-year-old children) and rhetorical questions, but logically back up their main arguments by citing official sources, such as the Auditor General.

The rhetorical style is formal and questioning, focusing on facts and procedures. The tone is analytical, with the goal of obtaining specific information regarding the unspent balances of officials' expense reimbursements.

The rhetorical style is sharp, critical, and penetrating, employing strong emotional appeals when describing the situation in Ida-Virumaa ("part of a hurrah-based project," "all of this is being torn down"). The speaker addresses the minister directly, repeatedly posing rhetorical questions and balancing logical arguments (access to justice) with an emphasis on dignity and security.