If they have the original certificate (digital) why would they tell CNN they no longer have the original (paper or digital)? The issue being dead as a result.
Again, there’s a big lie here.
You said — If they have the original certificate (digital) why would they tell CNN they no longer have the original (paper or digital)? The issue being dead as a result.
—
Well, keep in mind, the reporters are going to be asking questions of the state official that they called up — and in the news report, you’re not going to get everything that they talked about (the reporter to the state official) but only what they want to report on the news, so the state official may have explained it all very thoroughly, but CNN is only going to report what fits well into their story.
However, one thing you can count on, is that no matter what CNN did *not* report about, in the conversation that they had with the state official — the thing that CNN *did say* (on the news report) is going to be accurate, factually speaking.
So, when CNN says that the State of Hawaii converted over to a digital system in 2001, you can count on that (it’s “factual”). When CNN says that the paper copy of the birth certificate has been discarded, you can count on that (again, factually speaking).
You’ll note that the thing that CNN is not being really clear about (the part they are leaving out, or not explaining very well) is that the State of Hawaii made a digital image of the birth certificate before it was discarded. So, actually, whatever is printed from that digital image will be exactly what someone would get anyway, even if they were making a photocopy of it from a paper copy.
It’s really not a “conspiracy” here, it’s differing viewpoints and different reasons for saying what they say. CNN is giving “news” and not all news is what they want to give. The State of Hawaii is simply stating something that they’ve been asked about a lot (i.e., the Obama Birth Certificate) but they don’t want to go into those details of throwing away an original paper copy, so they use “language” that covers it, without really giving you a true clue as to what they mean. But, when you go back over it again, in the future, you see the language is such that you can mean it either way... :-)
And so it goes...