Interesting. I sort of agree with what you say in this paragraph and the article overall. Yes, these are reasons for jail: disrespect in the courtroom, causing the judge to receive death threats, and causing jurors to be doxxed. And maybe this isn't a reason for jail: a first-time conviction for a nonviolent offense.

However, I feel like something is missing here. I think it has to do with the fact that Trump has been involved in thousands of civil cases — 4,000 cases before his presidency. Others sued him for nonpayment, and he sued others to bully them. Things like that. This level of litigation is abnormal. Even considering that these were civil, not criminal, that seems almost a technicality, and it's hard for me to think of him as a first-time offender. He's been involved in a staggering level of wrongdoing. The system has been aware of it, so in a sense he was "caught" before; it's just that he somehow wrangled immunity from it all. I feel as though the sympathy designation of "first-time offender" was designed for others, not for someone like him. I don't quite know how to further explain this moral intuition, and probably there isn't any way to turn it into a legally valid justification for jail time. Maybe what it boils down to is just that I'm really, really sick of Trump's "arguments" and his teflon-like avoidance of consequences, but again, my feeling sick of him can't be used to justify jail time.