A report said Trump's donations to vets might be shady. His response was predictable.

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. But new reports are raising questions about whether that's true.

Late Monday night, Trump responded to a Washington Post report that found his January charity event – which he claimed broke $6 million in donations for veterans charities – 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:

Lewandowski also said he did not know whether a $1 million pledge from Trump himself was counted as part of the $4.5 million total. He said Trump has given that amount, but he declined to identify any recipients.

Since the report, the campaign has said the amount is not $4.5 million, Trump tweeted Monday that it is somewhere between $5 million and $6 millions, and it remains unclear where Trump's own pledge of $1 million ended up. But regardless of the numbers – a donation is a donation whether $4.5 million or $6 million – something has become increasingly clear: Trump feels this isn't about the money. It's about him.

Trump saw the report as a personal attack

On Monday night, Trump took to Twitter to make his feelings known: The Washington Post report was yet another "dishonest" ploy from the mainstream media, trying to spin his good deed into scandal.

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 — 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:

Trump is making this about Trump ... and maybe the veterans too

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:

The event was true to Trump's candidacy, with platitudes about veterans, viral internet meme stars, and invitees coronating Trump with an award. One of the veterans in attendance described the event as "so much America."

Trump invited three military veterans to speak, and near the end of the event they presented him with a ring honoring him for thanking the nation's military and respecting those lost in war.

Fahrenthold captured it best:

In a single evening in Des Moines, Trump showed Fox News — the host of that night’s Trump-less debate — that he was powerful enough to spurn the Fox network.

At the same time, he showed a national audience that he could conjure a multimillion-dollar benefit out of nothing, using connections, showmanship and his own wealth.

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.