This is hugely embarrassing.

Obviously spokespeople are rarely clued into the deeper machinations of organisations in order to more believably push the required narrative, but in this case you'd have to believe that she didn't know NED's:

• Origins
• Founders
• History
• Policies
• Practices
• Or any activity, up to and including major events this decade, last year, and even current activities.

What's more is that you can tell that she's simply never really had to work with an organization that isn't entirely in the pocket of US interests. It's clear that usually all she has to say is 'jump' and mainstream media asks 'how high? '.

When asked for clarifications she can't provide them. When confronted with evidence of financially supporting violent groups she just says they don't support them (apparently financing them doesn't count as support?). And when she gets nowhere the authoritarian streak comes out:

• Democracy is when a minority can overturn an elected government, but not in the US or if we like them.
• Who do you work for? China, Belarus?
• We support democracy and journalism because we've continued to allow you to exist (while actively working against you).