“The president was not exculpated for the acts that he allegedly committed.”

— Former special counsel Robert Mueller, quoted by the Washington Post.

Former special counsel Robert Mueller will testify before the House Judiciary Committee at 8:30 a.m. ET. The three-hour session is expected to focus on whether President Trump obstructed justice by interfering in Mueller’s investigation.

Mueller will then testify before the House Intelligence Committee beginning around 12 p.m. ET. The second session is expected to focus on Russian interference in the 2016 presidential elections.

Leave your reactions in the comments.

President Trump lashed out again this morning in frustration over former special counsel Robert Mueller’s testimony before Congress.

Said Trump: “So Democrats and others can illegally fabricate a crime, try pinning it on a very innocent President, and when he fights back against this illegal and treasonous attack on our Country, they call It Obstruction? Wrong! Why didn’t Robert Mueller investigate the investigators?”

He then suggested that he had a say in the format of the hearings: “It was NEVER agreed that Robert Mueller could use one of his many Democrat Never Trumper lawyers to sit next to him and help him with his answers. This was specifically NOT agreed to, and I would NEVER have agreed to it. The Greatest Witch Hunt in U.S. history, by far!”

New York Times: “No topic will hang over Wednesday’s hearings quite like impeachment. Mr. Mueller’s testimony may be a make-or-break moment for the wish of some liberals to try to oust Mr. Trump from office.”

“About 90 House Democrats already support opening an impeachment inquiry based on Mr. Mueller’s findings, as well as the president’s role in a hush money payment scheme during the 2016 campaign and other matters. Compelling testimony by Mr. Mueller could renew momentum behind the effort.”

“But the more important measure of whether impeachment moves forward may show up in polling and at town halls around the country when lawmakers return home next week for their August recess.”

Washington Post: “Democrats who demanded Mueller come to Capitol Hill to testify about President Trump and the 2016 election are worried the former special counsel’s appearance won’t provide the kindling they’re looking for to ignite public outrage over the president’s behavior.”

“Worse, some of them are concerned this morning’s marathon hearings before two House committees featuring a reluctant witness will be a ‘snooze fest.'”

Said one House aide: “Everyone will watch it and nothing will happen.”

Playbook: “Republican leaders have long been wary of how their party talks about the probe into the president, aware that some in the GOP tend to burrow deep into tangential issues that the public simply is not tracking. We’ve had countless conversations about the Mueller probe with senior members of the Judiciary and Intelligence committees over the past few years. Inevitably, the conversations naturally end up miles from where they began.”

“Why wasn’t Bill Clinton charged with a crime for talking to Loretta Lynch on the tarmac at the Phoenix airport, Republicans ask? Here’s a newsflash: Peter Strzok is not a household name. And Republicans oftentimes mistake the Sean Hannity-watching audience for the broader American public.”

Playbook: “Up until Tuesday, we all thought that Mueller would be alone at the witness table, binder at the ready, testifying about the probe against the president that he helped lead. Behind the scenes, lawmakers in both parties wondered if Mueller would be conversant enough with the sprawling probe to be a useful witness.”

“Now, Aaron Zebley — Mueller’s longtime chief of staff — will be alongside him. He’ll be a sworn-in witness in front of Intel, and a counsel in front of Judiciary. During the Judiciary hearing, Mueller can confer with him, presumably allowing the former FBI director to refresh his memory on confusing details of the investigation. And during Intel, Zebley can answer questions.”

“This has two practical and political effects: It could slow down the proceedings, giving each member of Congress fewer questions. And it could blow up some Republicans’ strategy of startling Mueller. The addition of Zebley is not the huge game changer President Trump and Republicans want you to believe it is, but it’s certainly a fresh dynamic.”

Politico: Mueller scrambles hearing by tapping top deputy as counsel.

Jonathan Bernstein: “Mueller’s testimony is important because he’ll be explaining exactly what his investigation found, and that’s newsworthy in itself. The president has been saying that the probe exonerated him; we’ll find out now whether that’s correct, or whether – as most people who’ve read Mueller’s report have concluded – it was actually devastating for Trump. It’s up to committee Democrats to make that story compelling enough that the media will portray it accurately.”

“There’s one other thing I worry about here. It’s a post-Watergate habit – in the press and in the wider political world – of treating presidential misbehavior as either worthy of impeachment or not. It leads to an irrational situation where stories that uncover considerable malfeasance aren’t treated as a big deal unless they’re likely to end in the president’s ouster. I think that happened with Ronald Reagan, Bill Clinton, and George W. Bush, and it’s happening on multiple levels with Trump – whether it’s Russia, emoluments, abuses of power, or obstruction of justice. That is, the paradigmatic story of a Washington scandal is one that ends with the president getting into the helicopter and leaving the White House, and without that ending the political world doesn’t know quite how to tell the story. That’s an advantage for presidents that we shouldn’t be giving them – and one that Trump, deliberately or not, is exploiting.”

New York Times: “The resulting food fight could prove to be riveting television as cable and broadcast networks carry the proceedings live with back-to-back hearings before the House Judiciary and Intelligence Committees. And Mr. Mueller may be compelling simply by virtue of his just-the-facts credibility after two years of near silence.”

“The real question, however, is whether it changes anyone’s mind in a highly polarized country that has already digested Mr. Mueller’s findings and dug in on its conflicting views of Mr. Trump and his guilt or innocence.”

Rep. Paul Mitchell (R-MI), a second-term Michigan Republican in House GOP leadership, told Politico he will not run for reelection to Congress.

“It’s not as if Mitchell is at political risk. His district — northeast of Detroit, in the Thumb of Michigan — is an R+13 that Trump won by more than 30. He said he has a 9-year-old son with special needs with whom he wants to spend more time. He also told us he’s tired of an institution that does nothing but bicker and is driven, in his view, by a vitriolic culture that rewards extremes.”