Analysis Summary:

The article's factual accuracy is mixed, as it's a panel discussion and lacks specific, verifiable claims. The primary focus is on the *idea* that impeachment raises the stakes for character in politics, which is subjective. There's a moderate level of bias, as the selection of panelists and the framing of the question can influence the discussion's direction.

Detailed Analysis:

• Claim:** Impeachment raises the stakes for character in politics. This is the central theme. Verification Source #1 touches on the institutional stakes of impeachment, but doesn't directly address the impact on character. Verification Source #3 mentions impeachment in the context of bad character evidence, but doesn't confirm or deny the central claim.
• Claim:** The panel will weigh in on Trump's impeachment. This is a statement of intent. The provided sources do not cover the content of the panel discussion itself.
• Claim:** The panel will weigh in on what's trending on the 2020 campaign trail. This is another statement of intent. The provided sources do not cover the content of the panel discussion itself.

Supporting Evidence/Contradictions:

• Verification Source #1: Discusses the institutional stakes of impeachment, but doesn't directly address the impact on character in politics.
• Verification Source #3: Mentions impeachment in the context of evidence of bad character, but doesn't confirm or deny the central claim that impeachment raises the stakes for character.
• Verification Source #2, #4, and #5: Are not directly relevant to the central claims of the article.
• The article's claims are largely unverified by the provided sources, as they focus on the *idea* of the impact of impeachment on character, which is subjective and open to interpretation. The sources primarily discuss impeachment in other contexts.