And your analogy is stupid.
You and Mom have never seen the candy bar. You’ve been told there is/was a candy bar. ONLY Dad has said he’s seen the candy bar. The candy bar is supposed to still be someplace WITH Dad.
I think you’ll find that my analogy makes more sense if you read its first sentence correctly: “You put a candy bar in your bedroom at 1:00.”
Again, your analogy is not at all comparable to the situation so:
“You put a candy bar in your bedroom at 1:00.”
is meaningless.
In your analogy, “you” would have to of had possession of the candy bar at some point and now it is missing or eaten.
Only Dad (Hawaii) has the “supposed” candy bar. “You” can’t see it, or access it.
And besides, it’s Dad has only given Mom one LEGAL statement about the “candy bar.”
Mom asks: “Is the candy bar “real?”
Dad answers with a double negative:
“I don’t have no fictitious candy bar.”
Which means:
“I DO have a fictitious candy bar.
Mom is not stupid, knows he used a double negative but since Dad puts money in her bank account, she chooses to BELIEVE that he did not answer her with a DOUBLE NEGATIVE.