I inherently don't like these sorts whataboutism used in your comment, it's a poor approach to questioning the morality/strategy of any country and but-the-US-did-x-minor-thing has long been used by dictators and the like to justify horrible things. Especially when it's not even top-down but a single phone call of some mid-tier diplomat.
That said, after reading Nuland's Wikipedia her brazenness is something I'd expect more from the old CIA than the modern state dept. It's rich hearing her protest against Russian interference in the sovereignty of another country while trying to play the cocky puppet-master role in the background over the future leadership of Ukraine.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Victoria_Nuland?oldformat=true...
But the main forgiving grace is that she was only assistant for Europe which isn't top tier and in other cases has demonstrated a maverick streak, not a person receptive to operating under authority or established norms. She’s also super pro-intervention in general which is less popular these days.
Most importantly this is not anywhere near the level of intervention shown by Russia. Really, it's extremely insignificant by comparison.
Russia has long been grasping at straws to build the western intervention is just as bad conspiracy. If all Russia has is some heavy-handed backroom phone call by a minor diplomat then the US doesn't have much to worry about.