"The results are actually sad," he added. "It's sad that we had a situation where a high level official person who worked in the office of the vice president obstructed justice and lied under oath. We wish that it had not happened, but it did."
-- Patrick Fitzgerald, Special Prosecutor

UPDATES FROM BRAD:

In meetings, on deadlines and following several items at once, as is BRAD BLOG Libby Trial correspondent Margie Burns, with whom we've been in contact from the courthouse. She's now back at her home office, and we'll have details from her soon.

For the moment, we'll point to coverage from the two outlets who bothered to investigate and report on this story while the MSM was completely ignoring it:
+ RAW STORY's coverage...
+ Huffington Posts's coverage...
+ Libby Trial bloggers (firedoglake, etc.) react, Wilson/Plame statement...

We'll also point you to Burns' earlier piece this morning concerning questions worth asking, which are even more relevant, in our opinion, now that Libby has been found guilty. What exactly were Cheney and Bush and their aides told about the CIA findings that the Iraq/Niger uranium yellowcake story was bogus way back in 2002? Burns examines here...

FURTHER UPDATE 12:42pm PT:
FROM BRAD BLOG LIBBY TRIAL CORRESPONDENT MARGIE BURNS

Margie sends in the following based on her observations and notes from this morning, as the verdict was read and beyond...

We heard at about 11:30 this morning: there will be a verdict at noon. – grabbed my coat, tote bag and cel, called bradbloghouse from the ladies’ restroom before turning off the phone prior to going upstairs.

Courtroom upstairs is crowded, somewhat tense – full complement of journalists but defense and prosecution tables empty for a little while. Then the defense team, defendant and his wife file in, none of them looking happy.

The entire prosecution team including spokesman Randall Samborne comes in next, looking – not perky by any means, but calm and pretty confident. The jury’s notes have indicated that the jurors had been 1) meticulous and 2) paying attention, which is what you want in these circumstances.

After a pause, Judge Walton comes in, two quiet announcements: “The jury has sent a note saying they have reached a unanimous verdict on all five counts.” And, second: “After the jury has rendered its verdict, there should be no response from anyone in the courtroom.” (Crowd of scribbling journalists takes this all down, adheres to it when the verdict is read, too.)

Jury comes in, about 12:05 (casually dressed; so much for the conventional wisdom that jurors dress formally when they’re returning a verdict). Juror #12, the foreperson, on the second row, reads with aid of a court microphone (she is a woman in about her thirties – so much for the consensus that the foreman was one of the men on the front row). Count One: guilty. Count Two: guilty. Count Three: not guilty. Count Four: guilty. Count Five: guilty.

In answer to the judge’s question whether either side has anything to add, the prosecution has nothing. Mr. Wells for the defense rises, asks that the jury be polled individually; the judge complies. Each juror individually answers “guilty” on each of four counts. [N.b. It would be interesting to know the breakdown on Count Three: there has been media speculation on a “holdout” from the first moment of this trial, but I know of no signs of one. Of course, I’m not an attorney. On the other hand, I was once a holdout.]

Judge Walton thanks the jury, adds that he will thank them again in his chambers, says that he has never seen “a better group of jurors,” one that so conscientiously went through all the evidence and testimony, and further praises them – appropriately – by saying that what they did “epitomizes what our judicial system is supposed to be about.”

The jury leaves, the judge and the two sides rough out a schedule for sentencing investigation, etc; Wells rises again to mention that he will submit motions for a new trial. By 12:15 the judge does, too. Defense team hugs, prosecution team huddles, and the trial is over except for subsequent statements outside the courthouse by both sides.

Wells announces outside that defense will file motions for a new trial and if those are denied, will appeal. Still asserting Libby's innocence. [N.b. WHY did ANYONE think Cheney, of all people on earth, was going to testify under oath?] More later.

ENDS