that does it for me today. be sure to follow on twitter, tiktok and instagram. you can now listen to every episode as a podcast for free. search for inside with jen psaki wherever you get podcasts. follow any time on documents investigation, the georgia case, and more, the evidence against donald trump grows almost by the day. some gop's are urging republicans to wake up and it meant -- and ex-president held accountable for his election lives. why aren't we here, in the u.s., doing the same? and affirmative action for

the rich. a new lawsuit takes a page from the supreme court's latest really to push on this is american voices. we begin with the world closing in even tighter around n donald trump on a host of different legal fronts. er trump's alleged coke. in the jackson documents case has pleaded not guilty for his part in the handling of our country secrets. according to the former u.s. attorney, the deal is evidence so overwhelming that he is due to present for years if he doesn't flip the former president. next is a matter for the generous! investigation. pressure pouring in indicates that has brought dozens of witnesses and the focus of the

selector scheme which trump andt his allies stopped to collect electors from states he lost in the 2020 election. these developments, along with another indictment in new york and an ongoing criminal investigation in georgia to ask why can't the gop quit trump? we ponder about exact question n in the dispatch trump may be guilty of a few of the scores of crimes he is accused of. he argues they just don't care. the former conservative federal judge who senator ted cruz onceo champion for a spot on the supreme court penned a blistering piece for the new york times, saying, quote, building the republican campaign along the newly indicted front runner is a miscalculation.

further condemning the party, he writes, there is no stopping republicans now until they have succeeded in politicizing the rule of law and service to their partisan political end. terms rebels recognize this. they are just too afraid to stick out against him. a select few who expressed some criticism, like former vice president mike pence, have done so cautiously and always from a defensive posture. >> do you ever second-guess yourself? that is a constitutional right that you had to defend to the state. it was not like tyou were goin to -- >> it is an issue that continues to be misunderstood. i know exactly what the constitution of the united states requires. i kept my end. >> joining me now, president of the leadership conference on civil human rights and a former assistant u.s. attorney matthew dowd and political contributor chief strategist for the bush

cheney 2004 presidential campaign and senior reporter for nbc news. er it is good to see you all. maia, your reaction to the reporting that jack smith is now focusing his case before the washington dc grand jury specifically around trump's fall selector scheme. >> my response is this is what has been coming for a while now. we have seen it in the march evidence, that january sixth committee presented to the public. we saw in the subpoenas that work flow out of jack smith's office. we have seen it from the news reporting makes the public record of donald trump's direct interaction and effect collector scheme itself means there is not a surprise that the loop is tightening. just remember, there have been recent reporting that december

18th 2020 meeting that was th described as the wild brawl inside the white house that included michael flynn and the pillow guy along with giuliani was very explicit evidence from witnesses that donald trump was having conversations about these schemes directly. we made a very public to eat after that meeting despite his own staff and white house counsel saying this is crazy. there has been a lot of evidence. it is not surprising to see a closing now. >> one of the political things i find interesting about the potential implications of jack

smith focusing on the fake collector scheme is it means this investigation is across several states. it is as wide as it is deep. i think about the fact that there is this emphasis and attention on arizona. we know the same is happening out of nevada. two states where we watched st republicans put forward republican senate candidates who were really steeped in foth big lie. part of the rejection on the part of voters in arizona, nevada, in these past midterms, it is like this is too much. i just want people to get back to legislating. i am not big into this idea that all of trans-legal problems are going to come back to bite him specifically in the political context of the 2024 election. if you are reminding folks in arizona, in nevada, what happened to democracy in their state, if that doesn't doesn't have implications for candidates down the ballot. >> i think that is a good point. what we have seen is donald trump has had limited accountability although we have to acknowledge he lost the election.

the main people that have suffered accountability as those that have become so attached that the voters distinguish, for some reason, between the crazy down ballot candidates and donald trump. that is the difficulty republicans are in. ar my view of republicans, republican leaders is they want donald trump to go away but they do not want to push donald trump away. that is the problem they have. they know a vast majority of their base today totally and completely supports him. they defined their sense of self by discontinuing to support donald trump in spite of all the facts. that is only the case in the relationship with donald trump. the voters don't have that same relationship with other candidates like kari lake or id

other candidates that have run. they distinguished those two things. for some reason, donald trump is in one place and all other candidates are judged on a different standard. >> we have seen a slight uptick in attack on trump from his primary levels. we played that down with mike pence hitting donald trump softly with election into ferrets after we sought ron desantis going after trump for being too lgbtq friendly. that is a bizarre line of attack. how are trump supporters, because i know you follow them online and watch the chatter, how are they responding online? do they notice the change, however minute from his fellow e republicans? >> they will immediately turn on each republican. even if they accept wholesale talking points. for example, a big thing right now is over trans-phobia, hatred of trans-people. that is a huge ron desantis thing. they have completely turned on

ron desantis because that is where the terms from the the attacks from the trump campaign have come recently. he is the closest thing to a competitor that trump has right now. this is a huge problem for them. this base has swallowed, hook, line, and sinker, this entire idea that he stands in for everyone, that there is an attack on donald trump and every single person who aligns with him. he has made this an attack on the rule of law. that is his entire campaign strategy. there spaces are completely sealed off from the mainstream media. they're not talking about taxes or the economy in hard numbers. they are not talking about traditional facts. they are just talking about the facts that they believe donald trump got screwed several years ago and will not let go of it. >> those are for 10 fax. let's get back to the fast

facts. i want your reaction to these comments from legal analyst barbara mclean. she told our colleague that she believes thea redacted portions of the indictment and search warrant tells a real story the doj may be trying to protect information regarding additional charges or possible defendants. your thoughts on that? >> i have learned a long time ago never to question her. she is an excellent u.s. attorney and prosecutor. it is probably the case. any time you have the breath of investigation that jack smith has, he has been looking at a number of possible crimes across a variety of people for a long time.

you will always play chestnut checkers. he will look at the end game you are trying to get to and what fox is trying to understand? do you want to protect your investigation and process along the way. if we take it back to the conversation you were just having, and i think he is exactly right. the real issue here is, is the american public going to get a o clear assessment of the facts? for those of us who read the indictment, and it was written for a late audience, it was a speaking indictment we are talking about documents, it wasn written for the public to assess for itself whether or not the public thought there th was sufficient evidence. we will keep seeing that from the team. we will keep seeing an effort to be transparent or possible as long as it doesn't interrupt the troop criminal up investigative process and pr expose it and endanger going after people who prosecutors believe violated the law. whether you are a democrat or republican running for the presidency, you have to remember your primary audience

is not your general audience. your general audience will be a lot of independence. a lot of folks will be looking at it with clear eyes and not just from a bubble. >> let's talk about that primary audience. you have some conservative thinkers coming out and seeing the obvious thing, which is is anyone paying attention to the fact that the person who could be at the top of our ticket is accused of multiple crimes, which are incredibly serious and imperiled democracy. you have chris christie and hutchison to some degree being the ones who are trying to prosecute this case against trump. there are six months between ut now and iowa. that seems like not a lot of time for some of these folks,

presumably someone like ron desantis who seems to be nt getting some attention and buzz to decide it is time to pave it and give up this idea that they are just going to stay in the trump lane until trump crashes and burns and then they are going to be the front runner and that lane. how long can they go on this way before deciding they have to go toe to toe with trump himself? >> i think everyone on this panel saw the same strategy unfold in 2016 in the republican primary, where everyone was like donald trump will fail and i will be a there to pick up his stuff. ic jeff bush tried to do a, marco rubio tried to do it, all of them tried to do it. they didn't want to get be the one until it was too late. if donald trump is the 2016 republican primary nominee on steroids. om o he is 20 points more popular than he was when he won the nomination. he never had a larger lead than 14 points and 2016. except for chris cristi and mesa

hutchison. they are doing the exact same strategy that led to donald te trump winning the nomination in this process. i don't understand the logic of it. you are running against donald trump. that means you filed on the ballot because you don't want ot donald trump to be the nominee. why wouldn't you make the argument of why donald trump should it be the nominee? at this point, my feeling is the only way they will be able to break out, is either some external event happens, and we have not seen one diminishing trump's appointment, or their able to break through the debate. we know donald trump has his hand on the controller. he can either go or not go. normally those debates are the l things donald trump excels at. >> there was a lot of news this past week. the story i keep coming back to, because i find it important, is the online harassment campaign from trump's diehard supporters they have launched against federal prosecutors.

i'm not going to say that it is surprising, but i think it is important to remember. people are just showing up and doing their jobs. they are nonpartisan and yet clearly the intention here is to stop them from doing their jobs, to have a chilling effect . i imagine this is just the beginning. >> i do, too. the existence of these trump forums are there to provide a main character, basically. this last week, the main character turned to these federal agents. as time goes on, they will continue to ship their targets. that is the issue here. he keeps providing, i would say,

names and people and targets. that is what happened less than two weeks ago now. he provided the obama's address . someone showed up there who went to january 6a previously, a and who was previously outside of a jail where protesters were held. that is the issue right now with this campaign is it is more targeted harassment than anything else. >> you are all sticking with me after the break. how the 2020 election lives may have been received. richard louis is here with the headlines. >> president biden arrived in europe for his five-day tour. a meeting with king charles and london is tomorrow. on the agenda, biden's decision to send cluster munitions to

ukraine, also whether nato should invite ukraine to join ou the alliance. a u.s. drone strike killed a group leader of the islamic state. he was riding a motorcycle in the region at the time of that strike. u.s. central command said no civilians were killed. d one person is dead and 15 injured after a car driving the wrong way collided with a bus in chicago. one of the car passengers died after the vehicle caught fire. e it is not known why that car was going the wrong way. before advil. advil targets pain at the source of inflammation. when pain comes for you, come back fast with advil liqui-gels.

(vo) consumer reports evaluates vehicles for car shoppers in... reliability, safety, owner satisfaction, and road-test evaluations... and the results are in. subaru is the twenty twenty-three best mainstream automotive brand, according to consumer reports. and subaru has seven consumer reports recommended models. solterra, forester, outback, crosstrek, ascent, impreza, and legacy. it's easy to love a brand you can trust.

it's easy to love a subaru. sleepovers just aren't what they used to be. a house full of screens? basically no hiccups? you guys have no idea how good you've got it. how old are you? like, 80? back in my day, it was scary stories and flashlights. we don't get scared. oh, really? mom can see your search history. that's what i thought. introducing the next generation 10g network. only from xfinity.

picture this, a sitting president down in the polls desperate to claim the power. when that president unsurprisingly loses, he refuses to accept the results and instead claims voter fraud.

the supporters lapping up conspiracy storm the halls of government, demanding the election be overturned. they do not succeed in the rightful winner takes office. in the following months, the rogue ex-president is held accountable for his actions. the country's legal system blocked him from holding political office for the rest of the decade. i am obviously not talking about donald trump because despite indictments and insurrection, trump is not only allowed to run for president again, he is leading in the gop's primary polls. i am talking about the former resilient president sometimes called the trump of the tropics. they just voted to ban him for voting for eight years. bring our panel back in. , let's start with you. brazil has a much more centralized electoral system. u.s. elections are run by the

state. out of that patchwork of rules help contribute to the chaos we saw in 2020 when trump and his allies tried to undermine the election state-by-state? >> it is a simple story. there is one thing we have to get through right now the effort to make it harder for voters to vote on grounds of false claims of voter fraud started after barack obama won the presidency in 2008. we had a slew of laws based on facts lewis claims that voter fraud was a problem into many states, sadly florida, wisconsin, we had some making statements that would make it harder for some people to vote to win an election. fast forward to 2020 and what we saw was a lot of people

running around and claiming that elections were stolen that were not. we should be thankful for people like the governor of arizona, for example, who came out on november 30th and said this was a fair election. our electors are right and setting the record straight despite being a republican. because of state-by-state, you have some folks engaging with a scheme to say we will send another swing electors. in brazil, you could not do that because you had an electronic and centralized system. you had a judiciary focus specifically on elections and you have other institutions of democracy that said we are going to say and attack misinformation when it happens. we will make sure highways are not blocked. it wasn't even just the fact that it was a centralized

system. it was the fact that you had other institutions working. we have to remember donald trump-based two impeachment trials with substantial evidence of wrongdoing and frankly what we had was a partisan process, not a bipartisan process in terms of weighing the evidence. even having people elected to office who said i don't think it was right what he did, i just think he has learned. we have learned know we have not learned he will double down on what we have seen a history in office. >> i want to underscore something that maia said which was the various institutions that came into play. in the run up to brazils last election, they thought aggressively against info and plotting they even plucked members of congress from social

media. if you will, let's compare and contrast that with how the u.s. government handled election misinformation in the run up to 2020? >> the opposite. currently what's going on in congress is congress is hauling disinformation researchers, people from stanford, harvard and the university of washington. they are hauling them in front of congress to get them to stop doing their work. i don't mean logging lobbying preceptorship or whatever they claim is happening. i know these people. they are using quantifiable data. she makes big network graphs of misinformation. she has been called from congress to stop her work. that is the point of this. republicans have been focused on this. that is why they brought that

twitter file sham in front of congress as well. i think the american appetite for this garbage, the idea that misinformation doesn't matter that it is being peddled by specific politicians for the intent of overturning democratic elections, i think most people in this country, and most people around the world, like places in brazil, and the general authoritarian handover that we have right now where people don't want this thing right now, the appetite is in the other direction. the appetite is for information and democracy. >> i don't want to be too heavy- handed with the comparison. i think i did enough of that in the introduction. it does remind you when you hear it in study form. it is one of what happened in this country. it is wild that outside of the electoral accountability that we have not seen legal

accountability for the former president and the circle of people around him. a lot of us believe that may be forthcoming. when you do that side-by-side what happened in brazil, the fact that he can't run again for another eight years and where we are in this country, what is the lesson? what is the take away? >> i have talked about this from the beginning. i will give you one of the benefits of donald trump. >> that is a rare thing that you offer. >> he will probably consider it backhanded. he has revealed a fundamental flaw that exists in our system, and irresponsible corrupt politicians can take advantage of those flaws. before donald trump, we all wandered around saying we have a great system and it works out

fine. many people spoke to and said we don't and our modern democracy can't compete with other modern democracies around the world. we have fundamental flaws in our system. the flaws exist because of the structures that we have. the idea that in the united states in america, we have 50 different voting systems based on the state which means you can drive from one state line to another in from the second easiest state to go into the 49th easy estate to vote in my driving 100 miles and it depends on what is in your end. that is a flaw in our system. there are others in our system that allow politicians to create their own districts and run in those districts. when you have a polarized divided environment where people can draw their own districts, we end up with marjorie taylor greens, lauren bogaerts, and all of those who are in responsible and don't care about our democracy. i will give donald trump credit

that he has revealed we don't have a system as good as we thought it is. there are people in michigan, pennsylvania, elected officials, trying to fix the flaws in our system. he revealed a comprehensive flaw in our system and democracy. our democracy is not as strong as we thought it was. >> thank you all so much. a new challenge to the college admissions process days after the supreme court asked for affirmative action. for asthma driven by eosinophils. it's designed to target and remove them and helps prevent asthma attacks. fasenra is not for sudden breathing problems or other eosinophilic conditions. allergic reactions may occur. don't stop your asthma treatments without talking with your doctor. tell your doctor if your asthma worsens. headache and sore throat may occur. tell your doctor if you have a parasitic infection. get back to better breathing. ask your doctor about fasenra. i'm saving with liberty mutual, mom.

they customize your car insurance so you only pay for what you need. you could save $700 dollars just by switching. ooooh, let me put a reminder on my phone. on the top of the pile! oh. only pay for what you need. ♪ liberty. liberty. liberty. liberty. ♪

every day, more dog people are deciding it's time for a fresh approach to pet food. developed with vets. made from real meat and veggies. portioned for your dog. and delivered right to your door. it's smarter, healthier pet food. our heritage is ingrained in our skin. and even when we metamorphosize into our new evolved form, we carry that spirit with us. because you can take alfa romeo out of italy. but you best believe, you can't take the italy out of an alfa romeo.

wayfair has nice prices

so you can have nice things. hah! kelly clarkson, we have a kid... and harold. wayfair's got just what you need... performance fabrics, stains don't stand a chance. no chance! -woo! dog friendly and wallet friendly... pug-proved. get nice things with nice prices at wayfair. ♪ wayfair, you've got just what i need ♪ it is called affirmative action for the wealthy. this week, a civil rights group filed a complaint demanding the federal government put an end to the practice of legacy admissions at harvard university. the boston-based lawyers for civil rights filed a 38 page

complaint to the department of education thing, quote, spots given to a legacy or trauma related applicant is a spot that becomes unavailable to an applicant who needs meets the admissions criteria on his or her merit. the group alleges that harvard is violating the civil rights act in giving preferential treatment to mostly white students. the complete notes nearly 70% of donor related and legacy applicants are white. this comes on the heels of the supreme court striking down affirmative action last month. than ever, the group says it is a imperative elite colleges and universities and this practice given institutions can no longer consider race in admissions processes. joining us is one of the lawyers behind this complaint, executive director for lawyers of civil rights. talk to us about how those who are representing came to the decision to file this complaint against harvard.

>> thank you for having me. we as lawyers for social rights represent a host of community- based organizations such as the chica project and the reader boston latino network. these are community-based groups that provide a significant amount of mentoring and tutoring for students in low income families after underperforming schools and they work hard to mentor and guide the students through the educational system so that they can end up in places like harvard. their work has made all the more challenging because up to one third of the seats at harvard taken up by students to receive preferential treatment based on merit or anything they accomplished but on the accomplishment of their parents or donors who supported them through the process.

that is unfair, especially on the heels of the supreme court saying preferences should be eliminated. fair is fair. let's eliminate the legacy and preferences for admissions purposes at harvard. >> some colleges and universities have taken steps to ban legacy admissions in colorado. it is banned at public universities. amherst college saw an uptick in students who are the first and the families to go to college after they stopped the practice, which speaks to the argument you're making to spots open up for people, who are on merit, deserve that spot. talk about the impact we could see his legacy admissions were stopped nationwide. >> what we see at schools were legacy and donna preferences have been eliminated is an opening democratizing of educational opportunities. most americans should ask themselves when was the last

time someone from my zip code, someone from my local high school ended up at a place like harvard? those opportunities are eliminated precisely because of generational wealth, generational influence, is what is triggering these preferences. that must and. we see them when those preferences and at places like amherst college, which is an elite school. we see many more first- generation college students going to the schools. we see more students of color. that is what we need in terms of college campuses. we need to broaden the communities that students come from. we need to recognize the achievement that many of these students of color have done that merit admissions but are significantly disadvantaged based on preferences that overwhelmingly benefit white people through donor and legacy preferences. >> some of the people who

defend the practice of legacy admissions, part of their defense as well cultivates a base from which you can pull financial aid for other students . obviously that is jujitsu wing of the argument itself. what do you say to colleges and universities who are hiding behind this idea that this is in some ways a way today diversify their campus in a bizarrely roundabout way? >> i think those arguments are completely misguided. what we see is that elite institutions and other places, for example, oxford cambridge, have discontinued donna preferences a long time ago so they can level the playing field. here, in the united states, where institutions continue to say we need it for fundraising. we need it for connections with graduates. some people have said online in response to the complaint filed by lawyers for civil rights,

harvard has more money than god. what else do these institutions want? we have to separate the institutions interest in becoming wealthier for the educational opportunities. the bottom line is the admissions process should be insulated from legacy and donor influence so we have an equitable level playing field. we need a fair process. this roundabout benefit the people talk about, that resources trickle down, i don't believe that. that is not what we see at campuses. what we see is the opposite when you eliminate legacy in the admissions at places like johns hopkins and amherst, donors still give money in the campus becomes democratized and

diversified. >> thank you so much for your time and insight. ahead, the biden administration has been blocked from working with social media companies to contain the spread of misinformation online. how can that affects the 2024 election? stay with us. ay with us. ts tas that are analyzed by ai. so researchers can help life underwater flourish. ♪ you've evolved. you've changed. so have we. that's why new dove body wash now has 24-hour renewing micro moisture for continuous care. new dove body wash. change is beautiful.

this week, a wanted judge issued an injunction barring biden administration if issues contacting administration social media officials -- from

speaking about the removal of depression, a reduction of content containing protect free speech. the content in question, vaccines and election misinformation. the injection is a case brought by state republican attorneys general who are upset that the federal government worked with the social companies to take down posts that spread this disinformation. let's the clear, letting it spread without checks can hurt people. in the case of vaccine disinformation, can be killed. the biden administration appealed the order thing it can, quote, cause great harm in preventing government from quote, engaging a vast range of lawful and responsible conduct. joining me now, former executive director of the disinformation governance board. she is vice president for the center of information resilience. how much harm could this cause surrounding the regulation of disinformation on social media

if this ruling were allowed to stand? >> this is nothing short of a weaponization of the court system in order to harass and intimidate government employees and disinformation researchers. i am really worried when we look back at 2020. you might remember the peds data operation that russia used during that election. that is when they hired american journalists to message to americans during that election. the fbi tipped off twitter and facebook that that operation existed. there is a card out and this injunction for national security issues. with a big lawsuit like this, no civil servant will want to get on the other side of this litigation. there is going to be a lot of hesitancy to pull the trigger and sound the alarm bell on issues like this and bring them up with social media company so they can take action. that is scary as we head into another contentious election cycle. >> you will tell me if i am

getting this wrong, but a lot of the communication from the government to the social media companies was about flagging things that violated those social media companies own policies. in some ways, it was good peer to peer communication saying we caught this thing, we are flagging it for you because according to your company's own principles and policies, this should not be allowed. it is hard to understand why, aside from political motivations of these attorneys general, this would be an issue. >> i think you are exactly right. there is something else important to point out. the plaintiffs in this case would have you believe any communication between the government and social media platforms amounts to censorship. that isn't true. they are simply flacking content that is violative of

pre-existing terms of service and it's important to point out and the majority of cases discussed in the injunction, social media platforms did nothing. they either left the content of or added more context. in most cut cases, they did not remove the content in question. this is a pack of lies about disinformation. it is a scary moment for academic researchers and government employees in our country. >> it is hard to understand how this even works in practice of government officials cannot pick up the phone and call social media companies. the fact that you got the biden administration pushing back against the ruling means the case could potentially go to the supreme court. your thoughts and concerns around the conservative majority court issuing a decision on free

speech limits. >> i am not a lawyer but let me say i think there is a lot of concern about when this gets appealed to a higher court that it will go to a court in texas where they had some pretty well in decisions about ms. information happening there. we could see something really concerning happen which is potentially the cut off of any collaboration between the government and social media platforms at all. we could all be surprised. i am not a legal expert. what worries me about this is what happens in the short-term. the legal system takes a long time. we have government employees wondering if they can even tweet or post on social media. that is being reported on right now. we are barreling down towards the selection, and election that will be taken advantage of not only by foreign actors but by actors at home seeking power and want to use disinformation to obtain not.

worried, also, for the fact that individual research institutions are named in this injunction. a couple seconds ago, you have been collins on talking about researchers at the university of washington. i have been on the other side of those researchers trying to do something good for the democracy. the fact that we have judges, members of congress, and the entire republican political echelon doing this sort of thing that is just weaponization speech and turning these campaigns and to realize harassment and safety prep for these people is un- american, disgusting, and it needs to be called out. >> you understand this as an expert. you also understand this as someone who has been on the other side of these threats and the chilling effects that is intended to have. thank you so much for your time. marcher taylor green has been left in the dark. not sure whether the conservative freedom caucus

wants her in their right. uh... here i'll take that. -everyone: woo hoo! ensure max protein with 30 grams of protein, one gram of sugar. enter the nourishing moments giveaway for a chance to win $10,000.

it appears mccarthy acolyte and firebrand of the movement may not be conservative enough for the house freedom caucus. before right group held a vote to expel the georgia republican two weeks ago shortly after she called former member lauren probert expletive during a verbose part of the house floor. nbc news has not independently confirmed this reporting. board member andy harris told political the support of mccarthy speakership, her actions during the debt ceiling negotiations and spat with albert played a role in her oust. this comes to the first time the caucus has ever told one of its own members to get lost.

actually, it would constitute the first time a caucus told him number to get lost if someone in the group could reach marjorie taylor green to let her know. ntg will apparently not pick up their calls. caucus chairs reportedly tried unsuccessfully to contact green both before and after the vote turnover. you can say a lot of things about marjorie taylor green but you cannot deny she mastered when the principal rules of love and war, break up with someone before they break up with you. that's all the time i have today. i will see you back here next weekend for more american voices. n voices.

for copd, ask your doctor about breztri. breztri gives you better breathing, symptom improvement, and helps prevent flare-ups. breztri won't replace a rescue inhaler for sudden breathing problems. it is not for asthma. tell your doctor if you have a heart condition or high blood pressure before taking it. don't take breztri more than prescribed.

breztri may increase your risk of thrush, pneumonia, and osteoporosis. call your doctor if worsened breathing, chest pain, mouth or tongue swelling, problems urinating, vison changes, or eye pain occur. if you have copd ask your doctor about breztri.