I don't think it really has anything to do with Mueller. Today, the conclusions he drew in his report are the same as they were the day before yesterday.
But some people believed, or at least hoped, that Mueller--who'd already made it abundantly clear that he didn't want to testify--would undergo some kind of Hollywood transformation, and deliver a series of gripping cinematic moments that would convince tons of people that Trumpty should be impeached.
That notion was encouraged by the press, who time after time insisted that "the movie is more exciting than the book".
What were those people THINKING? I didn't expect anything much from the hearing. If anything, Mueller delivered MORE than I thought he would.
But does that mean we should impeach Trump? Naturally, if all Dems would vote in favor, that could be done at any time. Applying the same condition, that could have been done at anytime in the past seven months. Yet not all Dems are interested, and their views need to be respected. Why? Because the Dems need to hold the House next year, and in order to do that, those people need to be reelected.
Given that there's NO chance Trump could be impeached AND convicted unless the Dems win the Senate next year, unless he goes completely insane, and drools and babbles every time he's let out in public. Though I'd welcome that, it probably won't happen.
So I think it makes sense to concentrate on winning the presidential election, keeping the House, and taking the Senate. If the Dems want to start a few committee inquiries in the House, fine. But stick to what's really important.
