donald trump is adamant that he raised more than $5 million for military veterans this campaign season and that it is all going to veterans charities. after reports raised questions about whether that's true,<u+00a0>trump scheduled a press conference tuesday to give more details about the donations' whereabouts.









at his press conference, trump explained the lack of clarity surfaced in a recent washington post<u+00a0>report by stating he "wanted to keep it private": "i don't think it's anybody's business if i wanna send money to the vets," before ultimately unveiling the list of recipients.









according to reporting from the<u+00a0>associated press, many of these donations were dated the same day as the washington post's article. trump associated the timing with the vetting process, "reviewing statistics, reviewing numbers and also talking to people in the military to find out whether or not the group was deserving of the money," he said tuesday.









but what his reaction to scrutiny of his alleged veterans donations really reveals about trump is how he handles criticism from the press <u+2014> viewing fact-checking from reporters as personal attacks rather than a nettlesome but necessary role in democracy.









last week, the presumptive republican nominee responded to the post's report which found his january charity event <u+2013> which he claimed raised more than $6 million in donations for veterans charities <u+2013> had come up short.









it's not the first time reports have raised questions about the donations. in march, trump spokesperson hope hicks shot down media inquiries in an interview with cnn that similarly wondered about these alleged donations.









"if the media spent half as much time highlighting the work of these groups and how our veterans have been so mistreated, rather than trying to disparage mr. trump's generosity for a totally unsolicited gesture for which he had no obligation, we would all be better for it," hicks told cnn.









at the event, which trump held as counterprograming to the republican presidential debate he boycotted in january, the candidate said he "broke $6 million" in donations, $1 million of which he donated himself.









but as of march, hicks said they were still collecting donations. now trump's campaign manager, corey lewandowski, says some of the event's biggest donors have backed down on their promises. the fundraiser actually brought in $4.5 million, or 75 percent of what was initially said, the washington post's david fahrenthold reported. he later remarked on twitter that even the adjusted numbers are still a hefty and admirable sum for a worthy cause:









at the time of the report, the campaign said the amount was not $4.5 million, trump tweeted it is somewhere between $5 million and $6 millions, and it was unclear where trump's own pledge of $1 million ended up.









but regardless of the numbers, something has become increasingly clear: trump feels this isn't about the money. he's making it about him doing a good deed.









"the press should be ashamed at themselves, and on behalf of the vets the press should be ashamed of themselves," trump said tuesday, even calling a reporter at his press conference a "sleaze."









the reports were a personal attack, trump said.









"instead of being like, <u+2018>thank you very much, mr. trump,' or <u+2018>trump did a good job,' everyone said: <u+2018>who got it? who got it? who got it?'" trump said. "and you make me look very bad. i have never received such bad publicity for doing a good job."









the washington post report was yet another "dishonest" ploy from the mainstream media, trying to spin his good deed into scandal, he tweeted when the report surfaced.









in many ways, trump's idea to host a fundraising event honoring veterans began as a reaction to the "disgusting media." in january, trump decided to boycott the last gop presidential debate before the iowa caucuses because of fox news host and debate moderator megyn kelly.









it was an early chapter in their months-long feud <u+2014> she represented the "biased" media; he felt she had personally targeted him in the first debate and intended to tank fox news's ratings by hosting a charitable even in iowa at the same time as the debate. (trump and kelly have, of course, now officially made up.)









trump's fundraiser was organized on a whim and featured the things that represent trump the most: middle america, an unyielding love for america, and trump supporters.









for trump, the washington post's report was an attempt to turn a good deed sour.









but fahrenthold maintains that wasn't the intention, launching a 16-tweet response to trump's comment. he has some questions:









january's fundraising event raised a lot of money for veterans. it was also undeniably a political platform.









it resembled a trump rally as much as it did a charitable event, i reported in january:









since then, trump has used the event to exemplify all the good he has done for the military and its veterans. in the weeks after, he used his campaign events to give large checks to various charities, rallying confidence that he can get good things done; with a snap of his fingers he raised millions.









the point is clear: trump, "under no obligation," did a good thing.
a report said trump's donations to vets might be shady. his response was predictable.
noauthor