Technically MIT isn't an ivy league school. But either way, what makes you think all Ivy's are the same?

I'm just saying that U Penn, being an Ivy, has as much "reputation" as MIT, CalTech, etc. Until someone pipes up with some sort of proof that it is actually better (which I doubt it is), then why should U Penn's reputation allow a Trump to go through, but at MIT such a thing could never occur? I'm not seeing it frankly.

MIT is absolutely harder and more rigorous than UPenn (and, for that matter, HYP). If you compare the GPAs of people from those schools and e.g. MCAT scores, MIT students exhibit a much stronger positive correlation.

This is pretty common knowledge, in the same way people know that Berkeley and CalTech have tougher classes than Stanford.

As an MIT grad with many friends at other Ivies, I can tell you that it is more rigorous than pretty much all of them. Princeton is probably the closest.

The man is functionally illiterate so it's likely someone else did it in his name.