Yes, but Globe readers DEMAND to read propaganda.
Leftist articles such as this always omit the critical information: Flynn was set up by the FBI in a perjury trap. There was no legal predicate to justify the FBI agents' questioning of Flynn. The FBI was not investigating a crime. The FBI already had the transcript of the Flynn-Kislyak conversation. The only reason for FBI agents to ask whether or not Flynn discussed sanctions with Kislyak was to induce Flynn to say something that was contradicted in that conversation, so they could publicly destroy Flynn's career and hurt Trump.
He did, and they did. Their scheme worked.
This was an American version of "Show me the man, and I'll show you the crime."
Leftists never mention that Flynn had to sell his house to pay his huge legal fees. They never mention that in return for Flynn's guilty pleas, the DOJ agreed not to prosecute Flynn's son for violation of the widely-ignored Foreign Agent Registration Act.
Should Flynn have simply admitted that he did discuss sanctions in the Kislyak conversation? Maybe so, as the discussion was perfectly appropriate for an incoming Director of National Intelligence. Or maybe he should have refused to answer, since the FBI had no need to know. In any case, lying to the FBI is not necessarily a crime. Telling an FBI agent that the sun sets in the east will not land you in jail, since the "lie" is not materially relevant to a crime. Neither was anything Flynn said.
Or that pleading guilty is much less expensive than pleading not guilty. Innocent people plead guilty to avoid being bankrupted.