I think I said essentially that in the op.
But yours and my own consumption of this interview isn't going to necessarily be shared by those who will likely tout her words as an exoneration.
As I said above, for what it's worth, ignoring her words about Clinton and others while her accounts of Trump are presented as relevant just leaves an ambiguity about the charges that doesn't need to exist.
If and when cultish republicans feel they want to advance her denials about Trump as the truth, they should be reminded of the similar denials about the 'big dog' whose relationship they've been pointing to deflect from Trump.
Moreover, her account of the plane trips is right in line with what Clinton has been saying about the flights and the relationship; especially the flights which people like to reporesent as a series of trips, rather than just the one that Maxwell confirmed.
I really don't get any impulse to not talk about or refuse to point to what she said about Clinton, as if the only political takes on this are going to come from our like minds; or as if there isn't potential political advantage that will be gained by this.
Like I said, any attempt to make political hay out of her denials by people who are inclined to believe her will need to reconcile all of that Trump love with all of their Clinton hate and accept that the denials came out of the same mouth.
Not all politics that's relevant, or necessary to counter is about what we believe; or assuaged by our beliefs.