Yes, that would be why the words sorta' probably mostly and afloat (as opposed to doing anything approaching well) were there. There was reason I was heavily caveating that
Please don't think I'm picking on you in particular when I say that the profusion of rather-probably-generally-basically-essentially-mostly on these boards has reached epidemic proportions, and it does no one any favors to sacrifice all hope of brevity and clarity of expression in favor of making safe, weaselly non-statements caveated into meaninglessness so that any attempt at correcting them swiftly becomes a semantic argument instead of anything substantive. Throw enough vague qualifiers in front of a statement and it can't be wrong, just misunderstood, but it also can't provide any kind of clarity. (It can provide a veneer of intellectualism, but that's a different, rarer, and far more intrinsically amusing problem.)
Again, I'm not going after you, Frumple. We've all done it. I've certainly done it more than I'd like, looking back. This is just a general suggestion that we all be mindful of this in future, because it really does inhibit understanding -- and this thread in particular is going to see a deluge of legalese in the near future, provided the Democrats' planned investigations into Trump actually materialize, and legal minutae are particularly vulnerable to obfuscating vagaries.