Or, it's at least better than anything else Congress is likely to do.
I understand the weird burnout people feel, hearing about public official misconduct so much. The news cycles have slowed down, but it's still a lot. That being said, I don't remember hearing anything (outside of a comedic context) that criticized Trump for issues smaller than Whitewater. It's probably good to remember that. For some reason, some people think the tax returns thing is some type of vendetta / canard Democrats won't shut up about, but that's strictly a bigger deal than the impropriety and gambling-addition-esque concerns around Clintons with Whitewater, considering reliable reports of tax fraud in Trump's past. Followup is literally the least you can do, with excellent reporting like that doing so much work for you (because it is all our jobs to keep officials in line – that's part of the point of voting).
If you think specific policy goals would be damaged by oversight, and having those policies advanced is more important, maybe even more important than always enforcing the law, I understand where you're coming from. I don't agree – I think enforcing the rules is more important, and if one person was the difference between your policy succeeding or failing, that person had way too much power anyway. But I get your goal, and I don't judge it too harshly.
That being said: the federal government spends an inordinate amount of time making the lives of Americans worse. Education and law enforcement are done almost completely at the local level, where you can at least drive to the hellish bureaucracy that's stopping you from doing something. The federal government exists, not for people wanting to improve their community, but for people who want power.
And they'll take it. That's how the system works. People in Congress can just take all the power they want. Thank goodness Obamacare didn't involve death panels – but it's possible for Congress to order those. If they pass single-payer healthcare, there will be many cases where they decide not to pay for continued-life care, or a risky procedure that could save your life. There's no other way to run that system in a fiscally responsible way. And when you have current Congresspeople wanting this Death-Panel-containing system, it's important to be clear: they can get what they want.
What's to stop them? Well, they're cowards, so if they think they'll lose their job over it, they won't do something. But elections don't happen once per vote. They can do a lot before they're asked to account for themselves.
The real thing that stops them is checks and balances. Other people, people with real power, that stop them from getting whatever strange thing they want. Maybe they disagree. Maybe they don't like the person proposing it. Maybe it's to damage their coalition. It's all part of the intentional design of our government. We want people with power slamming into other people with power. No elections would be worth a damn if they didn't do that. Someone has to make sure the person who wins the election gets the lump of power it corresponds to, and everyone in the system needs that too, and has strong incentives to make sure it continues. Otherwise, they might lose their power.
The Office of the President is particularly out of control. Obama had a kill list including Americans. Trump is no model of restraint. No person should be trusted with the power 21st century Presidents have wielded. So I strongly recommend having patience for even the more farfetched oversight. Our loyalty to our country requires seeming "disloyalty" to our leaders. We use them to check the power of each other, to make sure America doesn't experience tyranny.