She Let Her Obsession with MSNBC Take Over – Now She’s Facing the Ultimate Consequence!

In a case that has sparked widespread discussion, a 60-year-old Florida woman has been sentenced to federal prison for threatening to kill former President Donald Trump. Martha Jane Schoenfeld, a mother of two from Boca Raton, admitted to leaving bomb threat voicemails targeting two Trump properties earlier this year. A federal judge decided her actions warranted harsher punishment than prosecutors had initially recommended.

A Call That Crossed the Line

The drama unfolded on June 6, 2024, when Schoenfeld called the Trump International Golf Club in Palm Beach and left a voicemail threatening to detonate bombs. Law enforcement quickly traced the call back to her phone. Shortly after, another bomb threat was reported—this time targeting the Trump International Hotel in Las Vegas. Both threats originated from Schoenfeld’s number.

When federal agents visited Schoenfeld’s home, she initially denied any involvement. However, once presented with evidence tying the calls to her phone, she admitted to making the threats. Court records revealed she had also made a similar call to the office of Republican Senator Marco Rubio, though this incident did not result in additional charges.

Legal Fallout

Schoenfeld was initially charged with two counts of threatening a former president, each carrying a potential 10-year prison sentence. In September, she reached a plea deal, admitting guilt to one count while prosecutors agreed to drop the second. The deal included a recommendation for one year of probation—a lenient sentence approved by the U.S. Secret Service and Trump himself.

However, during the sentencing hearing, U.S. District Court Judge Raag Singhal, a Trump appointee, rejected the proposed probation, instead sentencing Schoenfeld to 13 months in federal prison, followed by a year of supervised release. This decision came despite the defense attorney arguing that the embarrassment and probation were punishment enough.

A Judge’s Perspective

Judge Singhal’s decision highlights the seriousness of making threats, even if the perpetrator claims no intention or means to follow through. During her sentencing, Schoenfeld expressed remorse, stating she lacked the knowledge, equipment, or actual desire to carry out the threats. “This was a lady in a condo that was watching too much MSNBC and got carried away,” her attorney, Mark McMann, told reporters.

McMann emphasized that Schoenfeld’s actions were impulsive and stemmed from her excessive consumption of cable news, particularly political programming. He described her as a non-violent individual who had been swept up in the toxic media environment.

A Crime and Its Consequences

The case has drawn attention to the dangers of extreme rhetoric and the consequences of making threats, even in moments of heated emotion. Following her July arrest, Schoenfeld’s case came just days before another high-profile incident—a failed assassination attempt on Trump during a rally in Pennsylvania.

Prosecutors had initially argued that Schoenfeld’s threats did not merit jail time, citing her lack of criminal history and the approval of a probation deal by all parties involved. However, Judge Singhal viewed incarceration as necessary to emphasize accountability, stating that threats against a former president are no trivial matter.

Starting Her Sentence

Schoenfeld will begin her prison term on January 15. After serving 13 months, she will remain under probation for an additional year. Her case serves as a cautionary tale about the power of words, even when no harm is intended.

The incident underscores the legal and moral weight of making threats, especially against public figures, in a highly polarized political climate. It also raises questions about the impact of media consumption on behavior, with Schoenfeld’s defense team attributing her actions to being “carried away” by the divisive political discourse.