a. you asked for a tl:dnr summary. of necessity that skirts detail.
b. the discussion is with regard to whether people think he should be confirmed to be a sc justice, not whether he should be prosecuted for perjury. i think most people just care if he's a lying liar who loves to tell lies, not if he's convictable.
Taking a trip down memory lane
I’ll admit not everyone is going to share this opinion, but IYAM you have a pretty weak case for perjury if it takes longer than two sentences to explain.
he testified under oath that he didn't receive material stolen from a dem senator and documents from the time show that he did.
I did not ask for a tl;dr summary. I was making a point that if your explanation for why this guy was lying under oath took longer than two sentences to explain ("tl"), then it's not a strong point.
Example: Subject testified under oath that he did not do X. This video corroborated by eyewitness testimony shows that he did do X.
Agree with most of your second point, although the skeptic in me says most people who have expressed an opinion don't actually care whether he is lying or not. They made up their mind as soon as they heard about the accusation.