Hillary Clinton faced sharp criticism from conservatives this week after she renewed her objections to a UFC mixed-martial-arts event held on the White House grounds as part of America’s 250th anniversary celebrations and President Donald Trump’s 80th birthday.
In a social-media post, the former first lady and secretary of state wrote that the White House “is not his house” but “our house,” and she promoted merchandise—hats, coasters, and stickers—intended to support candidates and organizations she said would respect the institution’s form and function. “Remember, during today’s literal cage match on the White House grounds: No matter what, it’s not his house. It’s our house,” Clinton stated. The post, which limited most public replies, quickly drew responses from Republican lawmakers, conservative commentators, and political organizations.
Rep. Tim Burchett of Tennessee referenced former President Bill Clinton’s relationship with White House intern Monica Lewinsky and other episodes from the 1990s. “They literally rented out the Lincoln Bedroom and don’t forget Bill’s activity in the Oval Office,” Burchett wrote, adding that “the vandalism that went on when you left was also well-documented.” The Lincoln Bedroom became a point of controversy during the Clinton administration after reports that major political donors had been invited to stay overnight there. Bill Clinton’s affair with Lewinsky led to his impeachment by the House of Representatives in 1998 on charges of perjury and obstruction of justice; he was later acquitted by the Senate.
Retired Air Force Lt. Col. Buzz Patterson, who carried the presidential emergency satchel known as the nuclear football during the Clinton years, also criticized the former first lady. “I was the Air Force lieutenant colonel who carried the nuclear football for your husband inside that ‘people’s house’ you’re suddenly so precious about,” Patterson wrote, before referencing additional allegations involving Bill Clinton and accusing the former administration of misconduct while in the White House.
Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton weighed in as well, writing, “Woman who stole White House furniture has something to say about ‘our house.’” The official Republican Party account similarly suggested Clinton should “sit this one out.” Some of the criticism pointed to longstanding allegations of damage and missing items after the Clintons left the White House in 2001. A Government Accountability Office review requested at the time by then-Rep. Bob Barr of Georgia estimated roughly $15,000 in damage associated with the presidential transition. Contemporaneous reports indicated the GAO found that some incidents appeared to be intentional pranks, while Clinton supporters argued that similar conduct had occurred under previous administrations and that the overall damage had been exaggerated. Barr had alleged that the outgoing administration treated the White House “worse than college freshmen checking out of their dorm rooms.”
The UFC event itself has drawn significant attention. A federal judge declined to block it from proceeding despite a last-minute lawsuit challenging the use of White House grounds. Organized as part of the nation’s semiquincentennial observances and timed with Trump’s birthday, the event has been described by supporters as a distinctive celebration featuring one of the president’s favorite sports. Critics have questioned whether a mixed-martial-arts contest belongs on the White House lawn. Clinton first raised objections to the plans last month before renewing them with Sunday’s post.
Rather than focusing solely on the event, the exchange shifted attention toward Clinton’s own years in the executive mansion. Opponents revisited decades-old controversies from the Clinton administration, ranging from the Lewinsky affair and related impeachment proceedings to donor stays in the Lincoln Bedroom and the circumstances of the 2001 transition. The back-and-forth added another chapter to the long-running political rivalry between Trump and Clinton, nearly a decade after their 2016 presidential contest. Both figures continue to generate strong reactions from supporters and critics, with historical episodes from the 1990s and early 2000s remaining potent points of reference in contemporary debates over the White House’s proper use and decorum. The episode illustrates how past presidential conduct can be invoked in present-day disputes, even when the immediate issue involves a different administration and a different kind of public event.
