The author of the CRS memo has learned well from the example set by the courts. Cherry-pick, and if that doesn't work without assistance, then ignore the inconvenient parts of what you cite for authority. Not many people will ever check your (not you, rxsid) false contention.
The memo was produced for some Congress critters. They don’t want the truth. They want talking points to try to justify misinforming the public. Obviously the inconvenient definition of NBC from Minor is gaining traction, else they wouldn’t try to baffle people with a bunch of bullishness.
One thing I learned from that NH hearing was that the lawyers didn’t have to take an oath. It was said that lawyers are basically always held to the standards of being under oath. (I just about choked when I heard that).
Maskell had to have known that he was butchering the text. Surely that must be an ethics breach, no?