I did not bother translating the debate as, one, I was busy and, two, a lot of others were doing it anyway so there was no point. What stands out in my mind?
On day one, one sentence makes so much sense to me. Abhisit asked them if they would really stand down; that when they campaign, someone is probably going to use the doctored tape again and if that happens, the democrat party would sue them. If that person using the tape was a member of the Pua Thai board, then the party would be disbanded again.
Dissolving parliament now and going for elections under the same rules would just lead to PT being disbanded again and everything would end up right where it is here (or was in September four years ago) again.
On day two, my favourite exchange was regarding the loans. Jatuporn said that Abhisit's government had failed and, among his "reasons" (and I use that term lightly), he said that the current govenment had run up the biggest debt in history. Aside from the very minor detail of a global financial crisis happening, Abhisit said that the biggest loan was actually made by the Government of Thaksin Shinawatra. Jatuporn said that it was to cover the debt made by the previous Democrat government, to which the PM replied, no, it was to cover the debts from the 1997 financial crisis by a government in which Thaksin was deputy PM.
Not that it would matter. Logic and reason matter not in today's world of True Democracy where a committee vote can overrule the laws of mathematics.