[butterdezillion]

Then why did Onaka mention Honolulu?

The statute says that the existence of a BC has to be verified, with no exceptions for non-valid BC’s. So if they have a non-valid BC they STILL have to verify that they have a BC. Pretend (in your mind) that Obama’s BC is non-valid and Bennett submitted this same request. What would a lawful verification from Onaka look like? Keep in mind what Bennett asked to be verified and the fact that Onaka has to verify the existence of the non-valid BC and anything else he can lawfully verify but CAN’T verify anything that he can’t certify as having happened (IOW, he can’t verify the truth of any particular birth claims).

Tell me what that verification would look like.

[Natufian]

No, the statute says that the verification confirms that the vital event did take place AND that the facts about the event are as stated in the applicants request.

IOW Hawaii have confirmed not only that Obama's BC contains all the information that Bennett asked about but it happened the way the BC describes.

It really is that simple.