If I were a lawyer, I might argue this:
They can say that all they want, but the charge here is perjury. Their argument does not degrade her perjury charge. The precedence clearly exists for the need for her to make truthful statements. (That is, it’s not just lying before Congress about the weather.)
She didn’t say “I don’t remember” or “to my knowledge”, right? Perjury laws exist here to maintain the oversight process, and she INTENTIONALLY subverted it.
This is only 1 of the 4 cases of her criminal perjury.