So, no.

1) Arrest warrant issued. This allows the local constabulary to bring a person into custody where they are

2) Arraigned. This is where they are formally charged with a crime, to which they

3) Plead (guilty, not guilty, nolo contendre), generally after prosecution and defense have reached a deal but if not they go to

4) Trial, where (3) is settled for once and all where a judge and/or jury

5) Adjudicates guilt or innocence and then things move on to

6) Sentencing, which may or may not include prison. Considering an arrest warrant was issued for a class B misdemeanor (which includes, I shit you not, both prostitution and "theft of cable television"), the penalty up for grabs is a thousand dollar fine and up to 30 days in jail.

So you're six steps out, bubba. This judge you want to hate? They got to decide whether there was enough evidence for (1), not for (6).

Tell me again how you're not oversimplifying in search of outrage. Or, alternatively, explain what the US Marshalls are likely to do for a Class B Misdemeanor bench warrant issued in North Dakota when the subject of said warrant happens to be a Manhattanite journalist safely ensconced several states away.