A better question might be "do you know of someone who has never lied about anything?"
That would be even worse than the original question. At least the original question didn't inject a deliberately flawed analogy.
To answer a hypothetical question that hasn't been markjo'd: Yes, I knew a fair few organisations who do not fabricate their very reasons for existence.
the OP asks why the focus on NASA and the answers are "because they faked this, or lied about that"
No. The OP asks why the focus is on NASA. The focus is not
exclusively on NASA, so a reasonable human has to interpret that question in the only other possible way: "Why do you talk about NASA more than you do about other groups?" The answer to that question is given in the first sentence of the first response:
NASA told the biggest and most ridiculous lie of them all.
Why are they receiving
the most flak? Because they've (supposedly) told
the biggest lie. Whether or not they lied might be controversial to you, but the actual answer to the OP is just an exercise in stating the blatantly obvious. It is the resultant objections which are off-topic, given how the topic was stated.
Now, if the intention was to ask why we focus
exclusively on NASA, then the answer becomes much simpler: "We don't. Next!"