I appreciate — sincerely — your apartisan disgusts at the methods, but I would like to suggest that you are doing "bothsideism": There is no equivocation between what O'Keefe is doing and what Windsor is doing.

O'Keefe's stunts rely on misrepresenting quotes, taking conversations out of context, and goading people into saying things that *may* connect to a conspiracy theory. O'Keefe tries to misrepresent that some person in Planned Parenthood is speaking for the entire Democratic Party — this is a complete stretch, even if the specific person O'Keefe is targeting is crazy. This is called nutpicking.

Windsor tried to get the Justices, who are important people that we *all* depend on, on the record in a very clear narrative. This is not some conspiracy theory, it is just asking them some garden variety question about what they think of the governance of this country.

Furthermore, Windsor had the honesty to both ask the same questions of everybody (so she was not really trying to customize her deception), and to share her conversations with everyone — including the ones with Chief Justice Roberts, which make him look rather good. She's not trying to embarrass anybody so much as reporting on important states of mind that we don't get anywhere else because of what some consider an oversight of the Constitution.

It's important to realize that O'Keefe and Windsor are not at all the same person. One is a propagandist, and the other is a journalist.