> but Mr. Clinton's team haggled, negotiated, and insisted on a
> > specific definition, one which they concocted for the future purpose
> > of deceiving the court.
>
> Yes but on a subject that was not germane in the case so he lied but
> did not commit perjury.
Okay, Ms. Jones alleged that she was harassed, and Mr. Clinton denied it.
Under these circumstances, assuming some poor woman really had been harassed, how on earth would you suggest she prove it *other than by looking to the man's character, habits, and predilections in the workplace*, things you describe as "not germane?"
Best regards, James Arthur