As expected, the Senate passed its version of the tax bill on Friday evening (the passage being the expected part, not the timing).  Also as expected, bond markets had some extra selling to do based on the confirmation.  Counting up the purported "yes" votes was enough to assume the bill was a done deal, but markets don't tend to fully price-in developments in Washington until they've actually happened.

In another way, markets will rush to price-in some of the reaction to events that haven't yet been confirmed, and then ease back in the other direction when the truth is more readily understood.  After Friday's initial Flynn headlines, traders quickly accounted for the risk that Trump may have done something worthy of impeachment, and that the wrongdoing occurred before the election.

As far as the "candidate" vs "president-elect" reporting that seems to be of interest to news outlets this morning, it only ever mattered for markets in the first few minutes of Friday's reaction.  Traders (and algorithmic trading programs) will trade on the info they have, research the underlying news, and adjust accordingly.  It didn't take long to ascertain that the events in question took place in December 2016, and thus obviously had nothing to do with a candidate attempting to influence the course of the election. 

The market's correction (adjusting to reality) was accomplished within an hour of the initial reaction.  Everything after that was sideways or inconsequentially weaker until the tax bill passed (when markets were closed).  As soon as trading opened in Asia, it was plain to see what the effect would be: another measured move to ceiling levels for 10yr yields (right around 2.40%).

Hitting 2.40 again keeps the pressure on bonds from a technical standpoint.  In other words, applying math and trendlines to the market movement suggests a certain level of negative momentum.  There's still an opportunity for support in the 2.4%-2.5% range, but that support is exclusively supported by the risk that the House and Senate can't get a bill on the President's desk within the next 2 weeks.  

Why 2 weeks?  If you think 2 weeks is less time than Congress should have based on comments about getting a bill to the President "by Christmas," understand that "by Christmas" currently means "by Dec 14th."  That's when the House is planning on being done for 2017 unless lawmakers agree to a special session.  Even then, it should be noted that special sessions in the 2nd half of December are extraordinarily uncommon.  

If you think 2 weeks sounds like more time than Congress needs to pass a tax bill, keep in mind that the Senate and House must now "reconcile" the bills they've each passed individually.  If they can't agree, the bill could die, although that's highly unlikely considering what's at stake.  In fact, it's so unlikely that markets will be more focused on the details of the bill as they become clear (i.e. headlines over the next 2 weeks regarding what the Senate and House have agreed upon).