As President Bush got a cool reception from Congress for his plans to send more American troops to Iraq, the opening days of a trial that involves the origin of the war has highlighted the administration’s determination to keep a positive spin on the rationale for invading Baghdad. The trial of Lewis “Scooter” Libby, Vice President Dick Cheney’s former chief of staff, is another example of a White House so convinced of its rectitude that it went to great lengths to discredit information that countered its visions and plans.

Mr. Libby is charged with perjury and obstruction of justice for allegedly lying about what he knew of the identity of an undercover CIA operative whose husband had criticized the White House’s rationale for invading Iraq. The case involves one sentence, which came to be called the “16 words,” in the president’s 2003 State of the Union address in which he said Saddam Hussein tried to get uranium from Africa. Former Ambassador Joseph Wilson had been sent to Niger to check out the uranium claim. His wife, undercover CIA employee Valerie Plame, suggested him for the trip.

In July 2003, Mr. Wilson published a piece in the New York Times saying the White House knew the uranium story was untrue but repeated it anyway to build support for invading Iraq. A week later, a column by conservative commentator Robert Novak outed Ms. Plame as a CIA operative.

A special prosecutor was appointed to investigate who leaked Ms. Plame’s name to the media, resulting in the charges against Mr. Libby.

Catherine Martin, who was the vice president’s lead public affairs person at the time, said Mr. Libby was told to speak with reporters who were thought to be covering the story. She said Mr. Libby talked with NBC’s Andrea Mitchell before her story suggested the White House was blaming the CIA for the inclusion of the uranium claim in the president’s speech.

This finger-pointing highlights the confusion and power struggle over the White House’s Iraq policy. It also shows that maintaining the case for overthrowing Saddam Hussein took precedence over refining that rationale to meet reality.

As Newsweek’s Michael Isikoff wrote this week, the case could turn into “a horror show for the White House, forcing current and former top aides to testify against each other and revealing an administration that has been in turmoil over the Iraq war for more than three years.”

For an administration that prizes loyalty and unquestioning adherence to its policies, exposing that turmoil could be more damaging than the charges against Mr. Libby.