I don't agree with that. First of all you mentioned banks in your previous post which are not "officials" by any definition and giving false information to them falls into completely separate category, so lets leave those out. Second of all bundling all "officials" into one category is incorrect. Talking to the health inspector or tax inspector is not the same thing as talking to the law enforcement. You have certain rights and obligations that vastly differ between different type of officials and law enforcement is a category in and of itself.
You are making no sense. If FBI was looking into the differences between transcript and what was presented to VP, then what would you call those actions? They were making an investigation. And if they were investigation what Flynn said to VP, then who was Flynn in this investigation if not a suspect? And if by your own words he was lying to avoid charges then clearly he knew he was a suspect and could end up with charges. So it's clearly a situation I'm talking from the beginning, a law that penalizes lying to FBI is taking away the right to defense for suspect/accused.
I don't know if your definition is correct. I was under impression that 5th amendment apply even if the person doesn't know said testimony would incriminate them and that it could be used to avoid all questions regardless of their nature and the nature of questioning. Was I incorrent in this?