These rants that everyone’s always been able to easily evade the law are bemusing.
Okay, good. The first step to tackling your confusion is admitting that your confused. Let me see if this example will help you to understand better.
You have locks on the doors to your home, your car, maybe even have a safe in your home somewhere. You have the keys to your home and your car and the combination to your safe, but in most cases, a locksmith or a competent criminal could easily gain entrance to your home, your car, even your safe. Heck, the police could literally break down your door or rip open your car like a can opener if they wanted to.
Now, let's say that you have a safe room in your home. The safe room is configured with a rolling lock vault door, biometrics, and a personal password. Let's say you have this safe room configured to protect you and your family, maybe you have some provisions in there. Let's say you keep private items in there as well. You get arrested, accused of a crime, and the government wants access to all of your records. There are some records in your safe room that could convict you of the crimes for which you're accused, and the government wants you to open that safe room to give them access to the records. They can't get in, because the systems are configured where only you can access it.
You refuse to give them anything, citing your 5th amendment privilege against self-incrimination. Now the DA REALLY wants in, and they're going to the courts to compel you to open the safe room, do you do it? No, of course you don't, because you don't want to go to jail! You stand your ground. A magistrate now orders law enforcement to take you to your home and forces you to open the safe room under the "penalty of law" and under duress, you open the door, they find your papers, you're in jail for the rest of your life. Does that sound like a country in which you want to live? One where you could be compelled to testify against yourself even though you don't want to?
Our rights as outlined under the Bill of Rights are not piecemeal. They're not mutually exclusive. They are meant to be all encompassing. You can't pick one (the 4th) without being able to also use/cite another (the 5th). Apple didn't have the keys to give the FBI, but the FBI persisted, demanding that they write something that would effectively reverse engineer their devices to give them access to the data.
Like any locksmith or competent criminal, the FBI was able to find someone who could unlock Apple's door. Apple never claimed the door was inviolable, only that they didn't have the key. That wasn't a lie or a misdirection, it's a fact.