No, that was the fig-leaf the republicans used to impeach him; they went after him for the sex. Same thing here; the democrats are going after Trump for the sex, but using the campaign violation as the fig-leaf.
That's not true. Not with Clinton, not with Trump. With Clinton the lying under oath was merely a token of his real dishonesty while in office. But the under oath bit was a bridge too far. Why he lost his law license... which was also "not for sex".
With Trump, the idiot left wants to nail Trump on ANY thing they can get him on. The Daniels payment is just an excuse and what they are relegated to settling for... since they can't find any real evidence of wrong-doing.