A white powder was found in an envelope addressed to "Alvin" in the mailroom at 80 Centre Street, where a grand jury has been hearing evidence in the case of former President Donald Trump, according to ABC News.

The powder was determined to be non-hazardous, but the intent behind sending it is unclear, sources told ABC News.

According to NBC News, the envelope also contained a letter with the message: "ALVIN: I AM GOING TO KILL YOU!!!!!!!!!!!!!"

Republicans have accused Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg of waging a "politically motivated prosecution" of former President Donald Trump.

Bragg is investigating a $130,000 payment to pornographic actress Stormy Daniels in the weeks leading up to the 2016 presidential election.

The payment was allegedly made to stop her from going public about a liaison she says she had with Trump years earlier.

Trump's ex-lawyer-turned-adversary Michael Cohen, who has testified before the grand jury, says he made the payment on his then boss's behalf and was later reimbursed.

If not properly accounted for, the payment could result in a misdemeanor charge for falsifying business records, experts say.

That might be raised to a felony if the false accounting was intended to cover up a second crime, such as a campaign finance violation, which is punishable by up to four years behind bars.

Trump insists he is innocent, and has escalated his attacks on Bragg in recent days. Early Friday morning, the former president warned of "death & destruction" if he were to be charged with a crime.

With additional reporting by AFP

Donald Trump’s presidential campaign is under fire after a local news anchor from Florida accused the organization of sending out a fundraising email that appeared to be from Governor Ron DeSantis. But the Trump campaign says the email is fake.

“It’s a slick fundraising email,” tweeted Spectrum News 13 anchor Greg Angel on Monday, noting that it included the Florida governor’s “campaign logo, photo, and all.”

“But - check the fine print,” he continued. “It’s a fundraising email actually for Trump PAC and presidential campaign. Always read the fine print.”

“A former popular president using a very popular governor to raise campaign cash? Not the first email like this. More and more it shows Gov. DeSantis’ orbit of power and influence - his gravitational pull in the GOP,” Angel added in a subsequent tweet.

The allegations prompted a flood of reactions.

"Trump is impersonating DeSantis in this fundraising email? Highly doubtful Team DeSantis signed off on this. Not a good sign for Trump 2024 campaign, sorry," tweeted media strategist Gabriella Hoffman.

Many in Trumpworld responded as well.

“Over/under on DeSantis campaign sending a cease and desist? Because this is yikes,” said former Trump attorney Jenna Ellis.

But Brad Parscale, a former Trump campaign manager, claimed that the fundraising email was fake. “You should confirm things first. Making more #FakeNews like usual,” he said in response to Angel’s tweet.

Alexander Bruesewitz, a conservative political strategist, also alleged that the fundraising email was fake. But he placed the blame among allies of DeSantis.

“This is a FAKE,” Bruesewitz wrote on Twitter. “No official Trump PAC sent this email out. Pro-Ron DeSantis 2024 surrogates are spreading this lie all over the place."

The Trump campaign later outright denied that it had sent the email.

“This fundraising email is fake and did not come from us,” Trump campaign spokesman Steven Cheung told Semafor’s Shelby Talcott.

Former President Donald Trump hosted a New Year’s Eve party at his Mar-a-Lago estate on Saturday, where he briefly spoke to the media.

According to the Palm Beach Post, the former president said he hoped that the Russia-Ukraine war would " get straightened out very quickly." He also claimed that he had received some poll numbers about his 2024 presidential bid that looked "fantastic" and insisted that the United States needed “a strong border and we need it now.”

“But Trump notably sidestepped questions about Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis' call for an investigation of COVID vaccines, a key legacy of Trump's single term in the White House, and whether he supported a national abortion ban,” the Palm Beach Post reported. “He also walked away from a question about how this week's second anniversary of the Jan. 6 violence and alleged coup attempt at the U.S. Capitol should be observed.”

In December, the House select committee that investigated the January 6 attack voted to refer Trump to the Department of Justice for obstruction of an official proceeding of the United States government, conspiring to defraud the U.S., making false statements to the federal government, and inciting or engaging in an insurrection.

A final report issued by the committee raised the possibility of additional "seditious conspiracy" charges against Trump similar to those leveled against members of the Oath Keepers militia over the insurrection.

"The Department of Justice, through its investigative tools that exceed those of this committee, may have evidence sufficient to prosecute President Trump under Sections 372 and 2384," it read.

"Accordingly, we believe sufficient evidence exists for a criminal referral of President Trump under these two statutes."

Committee member Jamie Raskin (D-MD) said that any potential further charges, beyond the four it has recommended, would be "a judgment that the Department of Justice will have to make."

Civil rights attorney David Henderson was asked during an appearance Sunday on MSNBC which criminal investigation Donald Trump should be worried about the most.

"That is becoming a difficult question to answer because he is facing so many different charges and is so many different places," Henderson replied.

“I think in terms of prosecutors, he has the most to fear down in Georgia because Fani Willis is not going to back off, and many of the arguments that we hear about prosecuting the former president are not going to be persuasive to her.”

A special grand jury, led by Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis, has been investigating whether Trump and his associates engaged in illegal actions when attempting to overturn his 2020 defeat.

“At the same time, I think the January 6 indictments – or forthcoming indictments, I think – are also a key area of exposure,” Henderson added.

“Because here's the thing, we've been talking about the taxes, and we look at the taxes and we ask did he commit a tax crime? I know if that's the best question to be asking. The better question is this yet another example of how he defrauded the public? That is one of the January 6 referrals, defrauding the United States.”

“I think that is notable now because essentially, he did the exact same thing that we are accusing George Santos of doing, misrepresenting who you are in order to gain an elected office and raise money for that purpose,” Henderson explained. “So, I think that all of these different issues kind of compound and make some of these cases even more persuasive in front of a jury.”

roar-assets-auto.rbl.ms

Donald Trump will be hit with criminal charges next year, according to Jordan Rubin, a legal analyst for MSNBC who previously served as a prosecutor for the Manhattan District Attorney’s Office.

In a new column, Rubin outlined why he believed that the twice-impeached former president would face charges in 2023.

The legal expert noted that the House select committee that investigated the January 6 attack voted to refer Trump to the Department of Justice for obstruction of an official proceeding of the United States government, conspiring to defraud the U.S., making false statements to the federal government and inciting or engaging in an insurrection.

"But unfortunately for Trump, that’s only one piece of the puzzle," Rubin said.

Trump is also facing criminal and civil investigations into his business practices. His efforts to overturn his election defeat in the swing state of Georgia are also under scrutiny.

"The former president should be worried," Rubin said.

In a dramatic and unprecedented move, federal agents seized classified documents at his Mar-a-Lago estate in Florida last summer.

Before the raid, the FBI uncovered "multiple sources of evidence" showing that "classified documents" remained at Mar-a-Lago and were "likely concealed" to obstruct an FBI probe into his potential mishandling of classified materials, the Justice Department said in a court filing.

"So with all of that looming, is it really possible for Trump not to be charged anywhere? Sure," Rubin concluded.

"But that seems unlikely at this point. And, partly because of the challenges of accusing a potential president of crimes, any prosecutor bringing charges will want to do so by next year. That wouldn’t eliminate the novel issues of charging a 2024 presidential candidate even in 2023, which would prompt a series of unprecedented legal questions, as Trump is wont to do. What seems clear, though, is that the former president is poised for a bad year."

Former Federal Judge J. Michael Luttig said this week that former President Donald Trump would likely end up behind bars if he were convicted of inciting an insurrection and other charges.

Earlier this week, the House select committee investigating the attack on the U.S. Capitol urged the Justice Department to prosecute Trump for inciting an insurrection, obstruction of an official proceeding, conspiring to defraud the US government and making false statements.

During an appearance on Yahoo News’ “Skullduggery” podcast, Luttig was asked about the potential charges facing Trump and whether he could land in prison if convicted.

“I believe that were the former president convicted of, let's say, all four of these counts, that a district court judge would sentence the former president to imprisonment,” Luttig said.

“That would be, of course, as you can appreciate, merely the beginning of the very long process, during which the former president would challenge the convictions themselves, the sentencing by the district judge, all the way up through the Court of Appeals, and then just violated.”

Luttig is a renowned conservative legal scholar who advised Trump's vice president Mike Pence.

“I don't know that a district judge would have any choice but to sentence the former president to imprisonment under the terms and provisions of these various offenses,” Luttig said.

Watch video below.

J. Michael Luttig on Trump criminal referralsyoutu.be

A House hearing on the future of federal work became unexpectedly tense on Thursday after a Republican lawmaker blasted a witness for not providing him with a simple “yes” or “no” answer.

During the hearing, Rep. Andy Biggs (R-AZ) asked Office of Personnel Management director Kiran A. Ahuja, a Biden appointee, whether any federal workers had continued to receive cost of living compensation after relocating to another area.

“Thank you, congressman, for the question,” Ahuja replied. “So if an employee moves out of a particular area, or adjusts and actually takes on a remote work arrangement, then their duty location changes according to our guidance and they take on the locality pay of that particular area.”

“So you’re telling us then – I’m going to extrapolate from that,” Biggs replied. “You’re saying no, nobody with the DC duty station has relocated to another area outside of DC duty station is receiving DC duty cost of living.”

Ahuja said that she was “talking generally,” which appeared to set off Biggs.

“I’m not talking generally,” he fired back. “I’m talking specifically. That’s the problem with your answers today. They’ve been generic, 30,000 foot, when people have asked you specific questions, I get an ethereal answer. I have a specific question. It is a yes or no question.”

Biggs complained that he didn’t know what the answer to his question was, and Ahuja then apologized and started to say she was trying to provide the “general sense” of the situation. But Biggs cut her off.

“I have the general sense,” Biggs said. “I’m not an idiot!”

The hearing sought “to examine the necessary actions to recruit and retain top talent in the federal government and to rebuild, strengthen, and transform the federal workforce to meet the needs of the country in the 21st century,” according to a statement posted on the website for the House Committee on Oversight and Reform Subcommittee on Government Operations.

Watch the video below.

roar-assets-auto.rbl.ms

A woman who recently lost her husband to COVID-19 is now hoping to save lives by urging others to get vaccinated.

Christina Lowe, 32, and her husband Mikel were strongly opposed to the COVID-19 vaccine and masks. They had assumed that because they were relatively young and healthy, the virus would not impact them.

"We thought the vaccine was rushed," Lowe told NBC San Diego. "We thought it was more about money and power than about Americans and protecting the people… We honestly thought that COVID was mostly political."

Mikel, who served as a firefighter for 15 years, contracted COVID-19 about two weeks ago and developed pneumonia.

"I went upstairs to check on him and his face was purple and blue," Christina said. "He was struggling to breathe on oxygen."

Mikel died from COVID-19 on August 29. He was 38 years old.

"He was a firefighter, a man of honor and integrity," his sister wrote on a GoFundMe campaign. "Please help my sister in law provide for her sons in this deeply devastating time. We all know this money will not be able to bring him back, but this money will be able to help Christina as she is now a widow that needs to provide for her sons."

Christina said that her views have changed after her devastating experience with the virus and she has now been vaccinated. She told Fox 5 Vegas that she hopes other people honor her husband's legacy by getting vaccinated and wearing masks.

"I understand some of you believe that this political-- and it might be, it could be political, I don't know that it's not," Christina said. "I do know that because of that decision of my husband believing it was political, that was why he did not want to wear a mask, he did not want to get vaccinated. He didn't trust them. It cost him his life."