‘But you can’t see why in 1991 the idea of Obama producing a “born in Kenya” book is thus a total non-starter, a proposition that would make Acton & Dystel look utterly foolish?’
The fact of Obama being paid trice to produce a ‘born in Kenya book’ is not my idea. It is what actually happened. You are the one struggling with the facts, not I.
As far as the agency’s position goes, they’ve explained it well enough. Acton and Dystel admitted they acquired the “fact” that Obama was born in Kenya. To maintain it for what—iirc, 16 yrs—in printed form can only mean that they saw excellent documentation for that “fact.”
The key fact here is that as of 1990, Obama's "born in Hawaii" narrative was a matter of public record due to national media reporting. That's fact.
Whether and to what extent in 1991 Acton & Dystel wished to urge some contrary "born in Kenya" narrative is of no moment, as the notion was obviously a non-starter even in theory at that point, and in actuality one that went nowhere.
No problem with facts at my end: the "project that wasn't" didn't alter the public record that Obama was born in Hawaii.