Want a better example?

Michael Flynn discussed sanctions with the Russian ambassador and then later told the FBI that he didn't.

The recordings show that they did indeed bring up the subject of sanctions. They spoke for maybe two thirds of a second on the topic. No specific action was taken. No recommendations were made. No advice was given. No requests were made. No negotiations took place. The conversation amounted to nothing more than a mutual acknowledgement that sanctions exist. The conversation was so innocuous that any reasonable person might immediately forget that it even took place. That's especially true if that person is charged with the multitude of responsibilities that come with being an incoming National Security Advisor.

Furthermore, anyone in that position would know, definitively, that telephone conversations with foreign agents are being recorded. There is ZERO chance that Flynn could reasonably believe that he could get away with lying.

FBI agents who took his statements are on record saying that they do not believe that Flynn was being deceitful. They believe that the most likely explanation for Flynn's contradicting statements is forgetfulness related to the insignificance of the conversation. Again, they are on record saying this.

Flynn's potential legal fees to effectively defend himself against this allegation far surpass his ability to pay.

Flynn's son was in some kind of legal trouble at the time. I don't remember exactly what it was, but it was bad. And after Flynn's guilty plea, suddenly his son is totally fine.

The statement "Flynn gave false statements to the FBI while under oath" is true. But it's not the truth

Do you get it now? Or do we have to do Popadopoulous next? Mueller is 2 for 2 in this game. Why in the world do you think Trump would ever consider an interview?