Analysis Summary:

The article discusses the impact of Brexit on the United States, featuring a panel discussion. While the general premise is verifiable, the specific claims made within the discussion are difficult to assess without a transcript. The provided sources generally support the idea that Brexit has impacted US companies and US-UK relations, but they don't directly confirm or deny the specific points made by the panelists. There is a moderate level of bias due to the selection of panelists and the potential for selective reporting within the discussion.

Detailed Analysis:

• Claim:** Brexit has an impact on the United States.
  • Verification Source #1: Supports this claim by stating that US companies need to treat the UK and EU as separate trading entities.
  • Verification Source #2: Supports this claim by discussing potential issues with a UK-US trade deal.
  • Verification Source #3: Supports this claim by stating that Brexit has changed the relationship between the EU, the UK, and companies doing business in both markets.
  • Verification Source #4: Supports this claim by discussing the impact of Brexit on US-UK relations.
  • Verification Source #5: Supports this claim by stating that Brexit is resulting in a stronger strategic relationship between the US and Britain.
• Claim:** The panel discusses the Thanksgiving subpoenas of James Comey and Loretta Lynch.
• Fail to cover:* None of the provided sources cover this claim. This is related to US domestic politics and not directly related to Brexit's impact.
• Claim:** The panel discusses the final Brexit negotiation.
• Fail to cover:* None of the provided sources directly confirm the specific details of the panel's discussion about the final Brexit negotiation. However, the sources do discuss the implications of Brexit, suggesting this would be a relevant topic.
• Overall:** The article's accuracy is mixed. The general premise is supported by the provided sources, but the specific claims made by the panelists are difficult to verify without a transcript or more detailed information. The selection of panelists (Jamelle Bouie, Susan Page, Ramesh Ponnuru, and Matt Viser) suggests a range of political perspectives, but the absence of a transcript makes it difficult to assess the balance and objectivity of the discussion.

Supporting Evidence/Contradictions:

• Agreement:** All provided sources agree that Brexit has had an impact on US companies and US-UK relations. Verification Source #1: "Still, the most immediate impact of Brexit for US companies has been the need to treat the UK and EU as separate trading entities." Verification Source #4: "The UK essentially sees its relationship with the US as one of the keystones of British foreign policy, and the US has long had the UK at its..."
• Lack of Coverage:** The provided sources do not cover the specific details of the panel discussion, such as the points made by each panelist or the specific aspects of the "final Brexit negotiation" that were discussed.
• Internal Knowledge (Limited Use):** It is reasonable to assume that a panel discussion on Brexit's impact would cover topics such as trade, investment, and political relations. However, without a transcript, it is impossible to verify the accuracy of the specific claims made within the discussion.