clarity on the x, y z....
Not the most important example, but an obvious one to demonstrate what I'm talking about. She's talking about People who drank in high school(x) and college (y) and binge drinking and alcoholism where 90 year olds are paying the consequences of their actions (z). With a drinking age of 18, the percentage of people who did x and y, but not z is EXTREMELY high, and she's trying to equate them. You're an alcoholic because you drank in college and so did my dad and he's an alcoholic.

She does the same thing in reverse later where she asks about him drinking so much so as to not remember...
and her 'but' is that a roommate said he was sometimes belligerent (which has nothing to do with memory)
and then another who basically says 'I don't believe him'.... which he disputes as being what he actually said, but whatever.

Neither of those comments are proof of anything or a challenge of anything. They're statements. He put in writing that he had never drank so much that he forgot... so why does this guy say you were sometimes belligerent and this other guy say he doesn't believe you?

It seems obvious he was pissed, and i would have been too. If that's a disqualification then fine... but that's not about lying under oath (your charge)...