True. But the "big picture" view here, as you well know, means that there's little reason for anyone in a decision-making position to have reason to question the Hawaiian officials' statements affirming Obama's Hawaiian birth. Such statements are consistent with near all of the documentary evidence as to Obama's birth (the newspaper announcements, INS and State Dept. files, the Indonesian school application, 1990 newspaper articles, etc.)
Apart from the 1991 agency bio, there is precious little documentary evidence suggesting a non-Hawaiian birth. (And in light of the national publications the year prior all reporting an Hawaiian birth, it's not credible to think the agency piece was other than the error the agency has acknowledged.)
The great preponderance of the evidence points to birth having been in Hawaii. The COLB, Long-form, and Hawaiian verifications are simply the more formal and official items of proof.
A lack of documentary evidence has not stopped those in the “Ineligbility Movement” from pursuing their mission.
Regardless of the issue, there are usually prosecutors who use the grand jury process to go on investigative “fishing expeditions.” If you put people under oath and in front of a panel of average American citizens, strange thngs sometimes can happen.
Frankly, I’ve been shocked that there has never been an Obama/natural born citizen Grand Jury or a congressional inquiry.