I stated this in another thread and it's relevant here. And it's exactly why threads like this and so many others completely miss the mark in terms of "attacking" Trump in any sort of way that isn't just a circlejerk amongst those who already dislike the man
Too often people take Trumps words and his statements, and even his follow up, and try to approach them either using typical political convention OR by simply using their bias to expect and only except the absolute worst case scenario.
Trump is not going to say he didn't mean exactly what he said, because he absolutely meant it. To those that can't stand the man, that means he LITERALLY felt that way. But that's not the only way to read "I meant exactly what I said". Another way to read that is that he "meant" it in a sarcastic/figurative sense, and so if you're asking him to clarify he's not going to do so, because to him there's nothing to clarify...he meant what he said, as he said it, and as HE understood HIMSELF to mean.
One of Trumps big things is not apologizing or correcting himself if he doesn't feel like what he did or meant wasn't worthy of apologizing or correcting himself. What that means is he's not going to apologize or correct himself based on what OTHER PEOPLE interpret or think or feel he said.
You know how some people will go "My apologies if I offended you, it wasn't my intent". Trump, by his general thought process, isn't going to do that, because if his intent wasn't to offend then he has no reason to apologize, because any offend taken was in error on the part of the person being offended. "It's a you problem" he'd probably say.
Same goes here. Hugh wanted to try to get him to go into more nuance, to explain specifically what he meant. Trump was having none of it. He said something, he knew what he meant by it, he liked the way it sounded, and he was going to stick with that rather than going into nuance. Which opens it up for legit criticism, but undoubtedly, but doesn't preclude it from being stated in a way other than the 100% most literalistic fashion possible.