Yes, these are the new “journalistic” “buzz” words, along with a few others. Keep your eyes and ears open for them while reading political articles or watching/listening to news and news commentary shows (which are basically the same these days).
Some other words you may come across are, “might,” “possibly,” may,” “may be” and “anonymous or unnamed” sources.
You will also commonly hear “reporters” refer to generic “experts,” “analysts,” and “strategists” as trusted sources.
Here are some recent examples of actual article headlines:
What Putin May Really Have on Trump. (Newsweek)
GOP strategist says Cohen investigation could be the end of (Trump’s) presidency.’ (ABC News)
This may be the scariest thing Donald Trump has said as president. (CNN)
CNN’s Acosta on Trump: “Deep Down This President May Just Be A Racist.” (RealClear Politics and CNN)
Trump’s CNN attacks may hobble legal case to block AT&T-Time Warner deal. (Reuters News Service)
Trump Impeachment Articles Could Include His Slurring of Elizabeth Warren as ‘Pocahontas.’ (Newsweek)
You should be aware that once a “journalist” enters the world of “would’a, could’a, should’a,” they are basically free to pursue any fantasy they may have, or pursue any narrative that they want to weave into the fabric of “the news.”
Anything can be attributed to an “unnamed source.”
Anything “might” happen.
Anything “could” happen.
Anyone could “possibly” do anything.
Anyone can potentially be an “expert,” an analyst,” or a strategist.”
Here are some headlines I predict you won’t see from the biased mainstream media any time soon:
“President Trump may be the most effective president in the last 50 years.”
“President Trump could win the Nobel Peace Prize for his deal with North Korea.”
“According to anonymous sources in The White House, The First lady is a wonderful wife and a wonderful mother.”