Rick Klein: “The tactic is clear: When you’re up this big in the polls, with no one standing as a real rival, only bad things are likely to happen if you answer reporters’ questions. But the strategy is less clear: When the campaign is this long, and when you’re promising a different kind of candidacy that shows that the candidate is willing and able to work for it, more bad things than good are likely to happen if you’re shielding yourself from the press.”

“Voters are unlikely to care about a four-week stretch in April and May where Hillary Clinton did not answer questions. The consequence, though, was clear when she broke that seal: The ensuing scrum covered everything from her Iraq war vote to her Benghazi emails to her personal wealth. It’s not an unreasonable expectation to see our candidates engage on the news of the day, on matters of policy and politics large and small… But if limiting press access is a strategic, as opposed to a tactical, consideration, it’s worth constant reevaluation.”

“After weeks of determinedly avoiding the media altogether, Hillary Clinton was finally drawn into an exchange with journalists Tuesday, briefly answering questions about donations to her family foundation, her emails while secretary of State, the millions she earned giving speeches and the Iraq war,” the Los Angeles Times reports.

“It was a rare unscripted five minutes for a campaign that leaves little to chance. It was not clear if the candidate intended to talk to reporters at all, but once drawn in, she sought to turn uncomfortable questions about her record and the controversies that continue to swirl around her and Bill Clinton to her advantage.”

The Des Moines Register has a list of the six questions she answered.

The Washington Post maintains a clock showing the minutes since Clinton last answered a question from the media.