No, you are quite right. What many on the Left and in the MSM, along with a few Repubs choose to conveniently overlook is that there are two clear, distinct and separate issues in the mix.
First, did Sessions commit perjury while testifying at the Senate?
It would appear not. Sessions responded within the scope of Franken’s question. When preparing a witness for testimony a litigator will often caution the witness to not provide more information than a question solicits.
Secondly, did Sessions have a conflict of interest in any investigation of the election?
Arguably, Sessions received something of value and should have recused himself on that basis alone. More importantly, Sessions believed he had a conflict of interest.
With the clarity of hindsight, of course, rather than throw red meat at the rabid left and MSM, it would have been better to simply announce that a Special Prosecutor would be appointed.
Why announce the appointment of a special prosecutor?
There isn't even any suggestion that an investigation is ongoing. As far as what is known publicly, Sessions basically recused himself from a non-existent investigation.