He was not, the judge is pronouncing that the case doesn't qualify under assault claims proves my point. Clinton was sued for harassment and not assault, that's how Jones approached the court.
Jones stated very clearly her claim of sexual assault - ""Notwithstanding the unequivocal ruling of this Court, plaintiff, citing Fed.R.Evid. 413(d)(2), (3), and (5), now contends that she has an actionable claim of criminal sexual assault based on the Governor's alleged actions in the Excelsior Hotel and cites as authority for this proposition an Arkansas criminal statute proscribing sexual abuse in the first degree, Ark. Code Ann. § 5-14-108. Pl.'s Opp'n to Def. Clinton's Mot. for Summ. J. at 23-24." The claims for both sexual assault and sexual harassment were both very much part of the suit.
What she described doesn't fall under sexual assault, the judge said that himself, that proves my point.
Curious GWB-Trading is not the brightest of the right though he is on this site. The Dunning Kruger effect is incredibly strong with him. When it is so provably not true and that would be enough to give an honest man pause to apologise for wasting time, he Kellyannes off to something that is still not what he asserted. A one eyed George the monkey falling from his tree grasping wildly in the hope he might touch a branch. Then if his does not die, "Yeah, I meant to do that". Bonus feature:
And to think all the dirt you are trying to dish occurred BEFORE the election. How did that strategy work out for you?