> binary executable portability, which isn't even an issue for Android at all
On the contrary, the AC which replied to you has shown that, as expected, the hardware on which Android runs is evolving quite quickly. If you were to install Linux would you choose to install a 32-bit version compiled for a Pentium processor?
> Google could have just created a standard compiler for Java (the language) to produce ARM assembly if they were so in love with that particular language
They would then be dependent on Oracle for any extensions they would want to add, or anyway be in the same boat they are today, more or less. The fact that the patent side of the case was thrown out very early in the proceedings means that Google's judgement was quite good (surprisingly so, since all cases, once they get to court, have a large element of luck).
Java is not just a "particular language", it was and still is one of the most widely used languages in the world, especially in the segment of devices like smartphones. You have to put Google's decision in context, when they made this decision Android had exactly 0% market share. Your argument is clouded by Android's subsequent success.