https://www.ohtuleht.ee/naisteleht/786925/kas-ilves-kasutas-sama-krediitkaarti-mida-galojan This is an Õhtuleht / Naisteleht feature dated 10 Feb 2017 (12:15) titled “Kas Ilves kasutas sama krediitkaarti mida Galojan?” (“Did Ilves use the same credit card as Galojan?”). It revisits the long-running Galojan/EEL controversy through the lens of institutional perks and credit-card access, pointing out that the European Movement Estonia (MTÜ Euroopa Liikumine / EEL) was not a marginal outfit but an establishment-facing organisation, and it raises the question of whether President Toomas Hendrik Ilves (described as having been connected to EEL’s leadership circle in the past) had any relationship to the credit-card/expense set-up that later became associated with Galojan. It also references the courtroom relevance of Ilves/EEL links (the earlier attempts to call him as a witness), and uses that to frame the broader insinuation: that Galojan may have been punished as the visible face of a system that served more powerful insiders too. Why it matters to her story: it’s a key “bridge” document connecting her case to a wider public debate about elite privilege and accountability. Even if the piece is written in a magazine/tabloid register, it crystallises the exact question your long-form article highlights: was the scandal treated as one person’s moral failure, or as a symptom of an insider system where certain people’s spending or perks were normalised until a convenient figure took the blame? As a Source Library item it’s useful because it shows that this framing wasn’t invented later — it was being argued explicitly in the Estonian press by 2017.