ABC This Week interviews during 2014: on Homeland Security

Hillary Clinton: More Benghazi hearings ok only to learn what to do better

CLINTON: Well, that's going to be up to the people running the hearing.

Q: If they ask you, you'll go?

CLINTON: Well, we'll see what they decide to do, how they conduct themselves, whether or not this is one more travesty about the loss of four Americans or whether this is in the best tradition of the Congress, an effort to try to figure out what we can do better.

Marco Rubio: No one has been held accountable for Benghazi

RUBIO: Yes. No one has been accountable. I mean, who has been accountable for what happened in Benghazi? This administration has a tendency on foreign policy issues in particular, not to worry nearly as much about what to do, and to worry more about what to say. And they decided not just to mislead the American public, but to mislead the families of these victims as to exactly what had happened.

Q: But you have the Republican Party raising money off this investigation. Is that appropriate?

RUBIO: I would prefer that we would focus not on the fundraising elements or the political elements of it, because I think it takes away from the reality of how serious a situation this is.

Q: How big a problem is this going to be for Hillary Clinton?

RUBIO: She's going to have to be held accountable for the State Department's failures.

Rand Paul: Don't let people who make money off weapons define policy

(VIDEO CLIP) PAUL: Dick Cheney then goes to work for Halliburton, makes hundreds of millions of dollars as CEO. Next thing you know, he's back in government it's a good idea to go to Iraq. (END VIDEO CLIP)

Q: Do you really think that Cheney was motivated by his financial ties to Halliburton?

PAUL: I'm not questioning his motives. I don't think Dick Cheney did it out of malevolence, I think he loves his country as much as I love the country.

Q: But you said we don't want our defense to be defined by people who make money off the weapons.

PAUL: There's a chance for a conflict of interest. At one point in time, he was opposed going into Baghdad. Then he was out of office and involved in the defense industry and then he became for going into Baghdad.

Rand Paul: National defense is important, but no blank check

PAUL: I think that's an incorrect conclusion, you know. I would say my foreign policy is right there with what came out of Ronald Reagan.

Q: But Reagan went through a huge defense buildup. One of the first things you did when you got elected was propose a nearly $50 billion cut to the Pentagon, bigger than the sequester.

PAUL: The sequester actually didn't cut spending; the sequester cut the rate of growth of spending over 10 years.

Q: But the point is you proposed curbing defense spending more than the sequester.

PAUL: Even though I believe national defense is the most important thing we do, but it isn't a blank check. Some conservatives think, oh, give them whatever they want and that everything is for our soldiers and they play up this patriotism that--oh, we don't have to control defense spending. We can't be a trillion dollars in the hole every year.

Peter King: US FBI should investigate when planes disappear abroad

KING: The FBI was not asked in. The pilot and co-pilot should have been the focus from the start. That would be ordinary law enforcement, investigatory procedures. But my understanding is that Malaysia is not really cooperating at all, are very reluctant to lay what they have out on the table.

Q: The focus IS on the pilots. Basically, everyone else on the plane has been looked at. No terrorist connections.

KING: There's nothing out there indicating it's terrorists. Doesn't mean it's not, but so far nothing has been picked up. I still have questions about the two Iranians who were on the plane. But again that could be a side issue.

Q: So what is the next step now for US authorities?

KING: I wish there was more FAA, NTSB, FBI involvement. This has to focus on the pilot and the copilot.

Jack Reed: No Benghazi cover-up; had 11 hearings & 25,000 documents

REED: The congress has already had 11 hearings on the topic, over 25,000 pieces of documentation have been provided to the Congress. In fact, the e-mails in question, I believe, were available in February in the context of the John Brennan confirmation hearing.

Q: What about the White House "talking points"? We find these 12 different versions, including a very definitive statement, we do know that Islamic extremists with ties to al Qaeda participated in the attack. That did not appear in the talking points.

REED: That did not appear in the talking points, but I recall when Ambassador Rice was being interviewed on one of the TV shows she essentially said there were extremist elements. She did not contradict that. The president's statement a day after the event, was this was an act of terror. So, there's no attempt that there was a story being created that there was no terrorist involvement.