As far as sheer entertainment value, Robert Mueller’s congressional hearing on Wednesday largely proved to be a dud, with the special counsel going out of his way to be as boring as possible, lest he be accused of harboring a partisan bias. Luckily we don’t rely on staid government officials to provide us with must-see TV, there being a number of streaming giants willing to provide that exact service. Instead the proceedings established two extremely important points, for the segment of the population that wasn’t listening the first (hundred) times: first, that Mueller’s investigation did not exonerate Trump on obstruction—and, in fact, laid out several examples of the president attempting to do just that—and second, that the president could indeed be prosecuted upon leaving office.

Asked by Judiciary Committee Chairman Jerrold Nadler if he “totally exonerate[d] the president,” as Trump has claimed numerous times, including twice today, Mueller responded with a curt “No.” Mueller added that his report—which in reality laid out nearly a dozen instances of possible obstruction, many of which were only unsuccessful “largely because the persons who surrounded the president declined to carry out orders or accede to his requests”—did not “exculpate” Trump. As for why the Special Counsel’s Office declined to reach a conclusion as to whether or not the president committed a crime, Mueller stated, as he did in his May press conference, that it wasn’t a matter of Trump necessarily being innocent, but due to a Justice Department rule stating that a sitting president cannot be indicted. (“While this report does not conclude that the President committed a crime, it also does not exonerate him,” the report said.)

Later, under questioning from Rep. Ken Buck, who, like other Republicans, criticized the Special Counsel‘s Office for not making a determination on obstruction (and clearing their fearless leader), Mueller reiterated that due to the Justice Department rule, he didn’t have normal prosecutorial tools to use, but that a president—like, say, Trump—could be charged with a crime after leaving office, which appeared to fluster Buck.

Buck: “Could you charge the president with a crime after he left office?” Mueller: “Yes.” Buck: “You believe you could charge the president of the United States with obstruction of justice after he left office?” Mueller: “Yes.” Buck: “Ethically, under the ethical standards?” Mueller: “I’m not certain, because I haven’t looked at the ethics standards. But the OLC opinion says that the prosecutor, while he cannot bring a charge against a sitting president, nonetheless he can continue the investigation to see if there are any other persons who might be drawn into the conspiracy.”

As many commentators have noted, most Democrats used their time to make the case that Trump would have clearly been charged with a crime were he not president, potentially setting the stage for action later; on Twitter, former chief White House ethics lawyer Richard Painter, who served in the George W. Bush administration, wrote: “Mueller just said President Trump can be prosecuted for obstruction of justice after he leaves office. It’s the job of the House to impeach Trump NOW!”