I implore you diagram the following sentence:

Please diagram the following sentence from the stimulus: "it's easy to get subsidies for propaganda" The video and the written explanation contradict each other when diagramming the above-quoted sentence. I understand that this sentence is NOT relevant for arriving at the correct answer-choice. However, it is bothering me that the video explanation treats "propaganda" as sufficient and "subsidies" as necessary while the written explanation treats these variables in the opposite manner: "propaganda" as necessary and "subsidies" as sufficient. Would an authority on the subject please put this issue to rest? What is controlling in determining who is the sufficient: is it the preposition "for," i.e. "for propaganda; or the context which lends support to the written explanation rather than the diagram in the video; or is something completely different? I am concerned that a similar phraseology might show in a passage in which the sentence is relevant to the "must be true" question. Please help! Thank you