Best of the Program | Guests: Senator Mike Lee & Adam Andrzejewski | 4/9/19

Hey, welcome to the Tuesday podcast, a really good podcast.

We go on the border with Jason Butfrill, who is one of the guys who is our, he's our chief researcher and in former military intelligence, and he's been working with me for over a year on these caravans.

We are talking about something on tonight's show at five o'clock, and we give you a sneak preview of that

on today.

We can tell you exactly what the goal of these caravans is and who is funding and who is organizing.

And it is pretty shocking.

Also, Mike Lee is with us.

We talk about the higher ed scandal and not the Hollywood one, but the one that actually affects you and your children.

We have the Biden

bracket going on.

States' rights, we talk a little bit about,

and suicide rates doubling now for kids at 13.

The experts say they know the reason.

It's not the reason I think.

And I share that rather

rather

forcefully on today's podcast.

I'm glad, by the way, Glenn, you mentioned America's Obsession, Bidenbracket.com.

You can vote on the creepiest photo of Joe Biden in a tournament-style bracket.

The result comes on Thursday, and during that Thursday show, that's only a minor part of it.

The real big part of it is the Joe Biden expose on what he's done in Ukraine and China.

Scandals that have not yet bubbled up to the mainstream press.

We've done a lot of investigation on it, and there's

an expose coming out on Thursday.

Join blazetv.com/slash Glenn so you can see it.

Blazetv.com/slash Glenn.

Use the promo code Glenn and save 10 bucks.

Miss a show, miss a lot.

You're listening to

the best of the Glenn Beck program.

Okay, we're waiting for Mike Lee to show up.

He'll be with us hopefully soon, maybe at the bottom of the hour if he misses this.

We know that he is extraordinarily busy.

I talked to him yesterday.

There's some amazing things going on in Washington, D.C., some amazing things that are happening.

And we better get a handle on our Constitution fast.

You think we still need it?

I mean, we have the Green New Deal.

If we could just implement that as the new Constitution, I mean, think of how much time it would save.

Yeah.

Because, I mean, sure, there's constitutional problems with something like the Green New Deal.

But if you just kind of push it through and make it the thing, then you don't have to worry about the constitutional problems.

We've learned so much about the environment.

I was very excited to see a new study that came out about plastic bags versus

reusable bags.

Yes.

Now, I brought this up at dinner last night with my daughter.

Oh, good for you.

Good for you.

Went over well.

So there's been.

Look, I thought science was just accepting.

You're supposed to accept the science.

That still happens.

Okay, yes.

And

she does.

The problem is the sea.

And we'll get into that in a minute.

Yeah, I just, we have Mike on, and he's only got until 8:30.

So we've only got - now we've only got about three minutes, Mike, unless you want to talk after the break, too.

But I know your schedule's tight.

How are you, sir?

Doing great.

Good.

Doing great.

Good.

Can we talk just a little bit here about what's happening on the border?

I mean, I think we have the human wave theory happening, you know, the human wave theory that it's a war tactic where you just have wave after wave after wave until you overwhelm the system and then the other country collapses.

Isn't that what we have going on in the border, Mike?

Certainly what we're going to be faced with.

Whether there's any one person who has that as their intention, or whether every person spilling over through the border has that as their intention.

This is what happens when you have year after year of lax border enforcement.

And it's also what happens when you encourage people to bring children, whether it's your own children or somebody else's, to come across, promising to release them if they're traveling with a child.

Okay, so we have this where they want it both ways.

The Democrats do.

You can't.

Does the president have the right to say,

no more asylum.

We are full up on asylum unless you go to your local embassy or you apply for it, but you can't apply for it at our border?

Does he have the right to say that?

Asylum law is tricky, but there are some levers that the executive branch of government does, in fact, control.

And I think there are some things he can do to be more restrictive on this.

One of the things that I would like to see is an aggressive move toward easing the impact of the so-called Flores settlement.

This is the settlement that requires us to release people within 20 days if they're traveling with a child.

It's ridiculous and it's encouraging human trafficking of the worst sort.

Right.

Mike, I'm sorry, I've got a break.

If you'd like to hold, we'd love to have you and talk about some other issues.

We're covering the border and we're showing you the connections to these caravans

right to Chicago.

This is a well-laid-out, well-orchestrated

group of people that have been flying under the radar.

And as we found it, because we started checking addresses, and gee, all these organizations had exactly the same address.

That's how we found out about Acorn.

Do you remember that?

It all led to one building in New Orleans.

We'll give you more on that coming up in just a second.

That's tonight at 5 o'clock.

Also, Thursday, Joe Biden and the

forget about his creepiness.

We got that covered in

the Biden bracket.com.

You go and you vote on the creepiest video.

It's the sweet 16 or the really sick 16.

We have that, but we're looking at the things that should put a Biden behind bars.

Things that nobody else is talking about.

We have that on Thursday.

Don't miss an episode.

5 o'clock of the Glenn Beck program.

All this week.

Blazetv.com/slash Glenn.

Use the promo code Glenn and you will save $10.

Mike Lee is with us.

Mike,

I want to give you the benefit of the doubt on something

because I don't think I've ever disagreed with anything that you had.

And if I did, if I listened to you for two seconds, I was like, oh, okay, I get it.

This whole flexibility act, where it's the family leave thing, I don't understand how

you are pushing this and doing this.

Can you help us out?

Yeah, sure.

I'd be happy to.

You're talking about the Cradle Act.

The Cradle Act

would allow a young mother or father, upon the birth or adoption of a child, to choose to take a short-term Social Security benefit following the birth or adoption of that baby in exchange for a delay in his or her retirement date of twice that length.

So they would have the option of taking one, two, or three months off

and take a limited Social Security benefit during that time period following the birth of a child if they want to stay at home with the child.

And then, in exchange for that, delay their retirement by a corresponding two, four, or six months

at the end of their career.

But there, but there

is no

pot of Social Security money.

And if I'm 20 and I'm having a baby, or well, now the way it is, if I'm 47 and having a baby, it's still,

I doubt that Social Security is going to be around.

So aren't we just putting,

aren't we just borrowing more money to be able to do this?

No, this proposal is budget neutral.

This proposal is actuarial sound,

actuarially sound, and it would not do anything to destabilize the fund.

Look, Social Security takes money out of people's paychecks, and it does so with the promise and the understanding that it's their money and it'll be there for them at retirement.

My point here is that there is at least one other time in the life of a taxpayer when an American ought to have access to that benefit should they choose to take it.

They ought to have this option after they have a child.

I understand that certainly the motivation here in that, you know,

obviously family is incredibly important and it's something

you've fought for the entire time you've been in the Senate.

I am,

and I wonder if you are as well, a tad concerned that we would be creating another

big moment in people's lives in which they have to look to the federal government for...

you know, to hold a big role in that event.

I mean, if you remember the Life of Julia cartoon they did back in the Obama campaign.

You know, it was every big moment of Julia's life was associated with some benefit from the federal government.

And are we not creating a new one here?

Yeah, so

I don't believe that's what we're doing.

And in fact, I think we're doing quite the opposite of that.

So instead of going with Julia, let's come up with a hypothetical young woman whom we'll call Glenna.

Wait a minute.

Glenna, at the time she has a baby,

has already been paying into the social security system for years.

She will be paying into the social security system for decades after the birth of her child.

So, Glenna ought to have the freedom to choose to delay her retirement date in order to spend a few weeks at home with her baby.

That is not a new government program.

That is simply making an existing government program more flexible in order to accommodate Glenna at the time she gives birth to a child.

Okay, so

let's say Glenna proves.

So, I might like that.

All right, so I agree with that.

I think that makes sense.

My problem is Social Security,

Glennon knows it's not going to be there at 65 or 68 or 88.

It's just not going to be there.

This is an unworkable, unsustainable system.

The unsustainability of Social Security is not in any way accelerated by this move.

The fact that it has been made unsustainable is as a result of decisions made by Congresses over the course of many decades.

There are a lot of things we could do to make that better and a lot of things we could do to make that worse.

This bill in particular would do nothing to either accelerate or halt the demise of the Social Security program.

This one just keeps it on the same path.

Okay, so wait.

So are we borrowing to pay for Social Security?

Yes, we are as a result of budgetary decisions made.

There's nothing about this bill that would accelerate that

because this would come about only as a result of

decisions that would be offset

both in the short term and the long term by, among other things, the delay in the ultimate retirement date.

And that, by the way, is ultimately something that we're going to have to look at as a way of saving Social Security, is to acclimate people to the idea that Americans are living longer.

As they live longer, we ought ought to be moving toward a system that indexes the retirement age according to life expectancy.

Hi, Mike, I have to tell you, I'm 55.

I can't imagine at 65.

And I know a lot of people who are being forced into retirement, especially work for the federal government, and they're like, Bernie Sanders is like 900 years old.

And he's not forced to retire.

You know, I don't know people that want to go away at 65 years old.

Now, you know, I'm sure there's a lot of blue-collar workers that will say, shut your mouth, Glenn.

But 65, my grandfather was old when he died at 60, I think seven.

I mean, that's what it was in the 60s and 70s.

You were old in your 60s.

You're not old in your 60s today.

That's exactly right.

And at the time the Social Security program was created, people on average didn't live much past 60.

And so as a result, they weren't spending many decades of their life as Social Security beneficiaries.

Now, people are living longer today.

We're happy that that's the case.

We hope

that very trend will continue.

As long as that trend is continuing, we do have to take into account the economic realities that that creates for Social Security.

Do you feel bad that you've scarred the audience by giving them a mental image of a woman named Glenna?

Oh, I knew

a woman named Glenna once.

She was a lovely person.

A sweet spirit.

She was beautiful on the inside.

Right.

So we don't have to picture an image of Glenn Beck

in feminine form.

Okay, that isn't about the bucket of chicken and somebody who looks like Colonel Sanders, but on the inside is lovely.

Colonel Sanders with his weep beating eyes saying, oh, yeah, you're going to buy my chicken.

While putting an addictive strong chemical in it that makes you crave it toward Nightly.

I love a man who can quote that movie.

God bless you.

Thanks so much, Mike.

Thank you.

You bet.

Bye-bye.

It's an interesting thing.

What do you think is?

Did anybody know what the movie is?

What is a movie?

Yeah, So I Married an Axe Murder.

Yeah, of course.

You quote two movies.

It's either So I Married an Axe Murderer or Princess Bride or Shitty Chitty Bang Bang.

Those are the only three things you know.

Those are the

three references you have.

Now, I will be saying,

I have like Rocky 3 and Rocky 4, and that's pretty much it.

I will put my movies in this.

I will put mine about 3 and 4 any day of the week.

Rocky 1, come talk to me.

Rocky 3 and 4, I don't want to see you.

That is right from the lips of Glenweena.

The best of the Glenn Beck program.

Hey, it's Glenn, and if you like what you hear on the program, you should check out Pat Gray Unleashed.

His podcast is available wherever you download your favorite podcast.

Alana Mar.

Alana.

Alanamar.

Alanamar.

Hey, Alanamar, update.

Have you heard about her requesting

the United States to step in and save this Muslim Brotherhood radical?

No.

No.

No.

Have you heard her thoughts on 9-11?

No.

really, really powerful.

I kind of thought she might be against it.

It's kind of like you got chocolate in my peanut butter.

Let's put these two together and see what we have.

Uh-huh.

All right.

What do you have?

All right.

Here's Alan Omar.

Talking about 9-11 and care and its creation.

CARE was founded after 9-11.

Nope.

Because they recognized that some people did something

and that all of us were starting to lose access to our civil liberties.

Oh, okay, so that's her description of 9-11.

Some people did something.

That's true.

Yeah, some extremist Muslims killed 3,000 innocent Americans.

That's the something these people did.

But it is hard to argue with the idea that some people did something.

Yeah, that is true.

It is true.

It is true.

Some people did something.

I just found it an unusual description of 9-11.

I've never heard it before.

And then, you know, first of all,

CARE wasn't developed after, it wasn't put together after 9-11.

No, no, no, no, no.

No, that can't be.

She just said it.

I know she did.

She did.

She lied.

She lied.

She lied.

Yeah, CARE was actually started by the Palestinian Council, which is a direct arm of the Muslim Brotherhood.

The Palestinian Council was told you need to have a think tank, which has been since disbanded.

You need to have a propaganda arm, which became CARE, and you need to have a fundraising arm for Hamas, which was eventually, those people were thrown in prison.

So the only one that was remaining is the propaganda arm of the Muslim Brotherhood and the sister organization of Hamas.

It's just amazing.

That's CARE.

And they were formed in the 90s, right?

I mean,

so maybe you could say they were formed after the first World Trade Center bombing, but not

9-11.

No.

And formed, you know, she makes Muslims, American Muslims sound like the victims of 9-11.

They weren't.

They were not.

I mean, some of them were

in the towers.

Yes.

But, I mean, you cannot, again, disagree that it was formed after some people did something.

That is true.

It is still true.

She's nailed that one.

This woman needs to go.

She needs to go.

This woman is really dangerous.

She's really a danger.

Here's a tweet from her.

I recently met with a couple of people to talk about Hoda Abdullah.

Some people.

She's called some people.

Some people.

Some people.

Political prisoner in Egypt.

I hope Trump brings up her case in his meeting with the regime that has imprisoned her.

Now, the regime that imprisoned her was

Al-Sisi's regime, the one who put the Muslim Brotherhood out of business.

Because remember what they were doing?

Oh, yeah, that's right.

They were burning churches down and crucifying Christians and all of that stuff.

She said that regime imprisoned her.

We must work to free Hoda.

Okay, all right.

So who is she?

Well,

she's just a

wonderful person that happens to be

directly connected to the Muslim Brotherhood.

This is a terrorist organization, a terrorist organization.

By the way,

one of the people I think that she is posing with in a picture was featured in an Al Jazeera-produced video dramatizing mom's situation as a human rights crisis.

Now, this is the boy in the picture with Alana Marbampa.

She's posing with the son of this Hoda woman that is in there.

He

after he was on Al Jazeera, she reached out and she's like, oh, I want to help your Muslim Brotherhood mom.

Why?

Well, because, again, CARE, who is holding her hand the entire time, is

the parent organization of, I'm sorry, the parent organization of CARE is the Muslim Brotherhood.

If the Muslim Brotherhood has people in prison,

She's going to stand up for them because she is being backed by the propaganda arm, CARE, of the Muslim Brotherhood.

This is foreign agent kind of stuff.

Yeah, I mean,

she calls herself a second-class citizen.

She's tired of being treated like a second-class citizen.

I don't know.

She goes on to say.

This is the best of the Glenn Beck program.

I want to tell you, real quick, we're going to talk next hour about our kids.

The suicide rate has almost doubled again

with our kids under 13.

It is terrifying what's going on.

The experts say one thing.

I have quite a different take on it.

We'll give that to you next hour.

Also, we're going to talk about the higher ed scandal that is going on.

I shouldn't say scan.

Scam

that is going on.

That's after the top of the hour.

I'd like to see those suicide rates matched up against the increased use of reusable garbage bags, grocery bags.

Really?

Yeah, because

there's a huge thing that's out now that if you have to, for every reusable bag you use, you have to reuse it 7,100 times to equal a plastic bag at a grocery store.

Now, many of you may not use that reusable bag that many times.

However, if it's organic cotton,

It's 20,000 times.

You have to use it.

Now, here's my daughter's argument on this.

First of all, the oceans, and we can get into that later.

But she said, the problem is, is that we're not, we're going out, we're creating a new industry of these new bags.

She's like, you don't go out and buy a new bag for this.

You use a bag that you already have.

The problem is, is that it's created, this environmental thing is creating a whole new buttload.

of products for you to go out and buy and own.

So you're not reducing.

No, of course not.

Also, it's really unhealthy.

They did a study of this.

University of Pennsylvania and George Mason did a study of this when they banned plastic bags in San Francisco.

And in the wake of that, they had a 46% increase in foodborne illness.

Wow.

They found deaths and ER visits spiked as soon as the ban went into effect.

And it's because people put meat and vegetables

in their bags.

They throw it in their hot trunk.

It cooks in there.

And then they go back with the same bag the next time and buy new food and produce rolls around and all that.

You're supposed to be washing them in between every use.

And if you do, you have absolutely no environmental impact, even if you include all the marine waste with the plastic bags.

Which, by the way, 90% of it comes from China.

So that's a whole notation.

But it is amazing the way they're able to create these brand new industries.

This is the best of the Glenn Beck program.

Adam Angieski is with us now.

He is a CEO and founder of OpenTheBooks.com.

It works to capture and post all disclosed spending at every level of government, federal, state, and local.

They have successfully captured nearly $4 billion in public expenditures, rapidly growing their data in all 50 states.

They are a government watchdog organization.

They do not accept any government funding.

He and Stephen Moore, a friend of the program, worked on an article called The Biggest College Scandal of Them All.

And we welcome you, Adam, to the program.

How are you?

Glenn, thank you very much.

Thank you for your interest in our work.

Yeah, you bet.

This is, to me,

I have been watching this for about 20 years now, and everybody talks about the price of health care and the price of food and the price of gas and everything else.

And no one has talked about the price of college, at least at the government level, because they're enabling this to happen.

And it is breaking our back.

Tell me what you found.

So we found basically seven facts that Americans don't know regarding higher education.

So the biggest scandal facing

higher ed is certainly the cost of higher education.

And you mentioned the $1.7 trillion in student debt, but that now exceeds the $1 trillion Americans have put on their credit cards or the $1.1 trillion that we've accumulated in debt on auto loans.

So it's a huge, huge amount of money.

You know, one of the most troubling facts that we found is that

the American people are paying for wealthy schools to get even richer.

We found that the top 25 schools in the country hold a collective endowment, that's money in the bank, of a quarter trillion dollars of endowment funds.

They don't need taxpayer help, but just last year, the American taxpayer put $7 billion worth of federal taxpayer subsidies into those 25 wealthy schools.

And they need to lighten the load in the American taxpayer.

I remember, Adam, this years ago.

I just on the back of an envelope did some figuring.

And just on the

interest that they are accruing every year, Harvard could pay for everybody that goes to Harvard.

And I think they could open up like six satellite schools.

And the principal would have never been touched.

Well, you're right about that.

So, we did analysis of the eight schools of the Ivy League, and collectively they hold north of $120 billion.

We forecast that over the next 20 years, they'll hold a trillion-dollar endowment.

And you're exactly right, Glenn.

They could finance the next 51 years with no further gifts, free tuition for every single undergraduate student.

So, why is the federal government involved in this?

This is this

This would be like giving Apple

welfare.

They don't need it.

So, you know, all of this federal student aid was supposed to make college more affordable.

But I think higher ed has once again proved the rule that the fastest way to make something really expensive is for Washington, D.C.

politicians, Glenn, to throw more public money at a problem to make it, quote unquote, affordable.

Well, if you have,

honestly, there's there is no uh reason that if you want to live on the beach the federal government should underwrite your insurance.

It only makes things much much much worse

when it when it comes to these loans if if you're guaranteed to get a loan and you know it's a guaranteed thing what what stops the colleges from saying you know what everybody's happy they're just gonna they're just gonna take the loan out anyway because they don't have a choice.

Just keep raising the price.

Well, what Steve Moore and I found was that tax dollars are actually driving up college tuition costs.

And there's a great example of this in one of the higher ed verticals, and that is colleges of cosmetology.

They're beauty schools.

You go there for one year, you come out with a license to cut hair.

do massage therapy, manicure nails.

The largest chain of these beauty schools, the Empire Beauty Schools, they've received more than $1.5 billion over the course of the past four years in federal taxpayer student aid assistance.

And they now admit they charge, Glenn, and this is pretty incredible, they charge $28,000 a year for that one-year program.

To cut hair?

Yes, that's more tuition than Big Ten college universities charge.

They can only do it because we, the American taxpayer, are funding them to such a great degree.

That is, and we gave them half a, did I hear that right?

Half a billion dollars?

Our data shows at OpenTheBooks.com that over $500 million worth of federal student aid subsidies flowed to Empire Beauty Schools in the last four years.

What the hell?

And so at $28,000, I mean, those poor students and their families, they can't pay that money back.

I mean, that's just an unbelievable amount of money.

So

what is this headed towards?

Well,

look, the Education Secretary, Betsy DeVos, in many ways, she's been a pioneer and a reformer in higher education.

But right now, she wants to actually weaken accreditation standards.

So you're going to get more schools like these beauty schools.

You're going to get more schools like a music and design academy that charges between $38,000 and $48,000 a year on tuition, and they admit that their average graduate comes out and only makes $28,000 a year.

We don't need weaker accreditation controls.

We need stronger accreditation controls.

We have in your report Crescent City School of Gambling and Bartending received $9.5 million in federal funding between fiscal 14 and 2017.

How much money are you making

after graduating from the School of Gaming?

Well, and that begs the question, Glenn.

Do you like your tax dollar shaken or stirred?

Jeez.

This is not.

That one at least sounds fun.

I mean, you know, I know.

Here's another one we identified that actually sounds fun, and it's the

Professional Golfers Career College.

And over the last four years, taxpayers put $5 million into that school.

They tout themselves.

Their competitive advantage is that they're the only school, they say, where you can golf seven days a week.

Now, the course doesn't even open up till noon, and maybe that's because none of the students are up that early.

It's like Caddyshack turned into a university.

I love it.

Here's one that

we had no idea that was going on.

So over the course of the past four years, a billion dollars, nearly $1 billion, has flowed into 112 seminaries to mint pastors and priests.

And to the extent that everyone listening to your program feels that government money eventually could be used to control messaging content, this is very troubling.

Yeah, geez.

So is there any move at all to cut these schools off, especially the ones with these gigantic

funds behind them?

So I think there's three nonpartisan reforms that the Secretary DeVos can bring forth.

One is wealthy colleges must make themselves affordable.

Glenn, there's no public purpose argument for working and middle-class taxpayers to fund the Harvards, the Notre Dames, the Stanfords.

They literally have all the money in the world, and they need to lighten the load on the American taxpayer.

Hang on just a second.

Let me ask you this.

Why should we be giving loans out to an organization that has a billion dollars worth of funds?

Why don't they underwrite the loans themselves?

They can do it.

If they believe in it, they should underwrite the loans themselves.

Why are we doing it?

Harvard has $34 billion, I think it is.

I mean, they have way more than a billion billion dollars.

Yeah, Harvard has $34 billion in their endowment.

I mean, there is no public-purpose argument for we, the people, to underwrite all of that at these schools.

Look, they're 501c3 educational public charities.

They have an unlimited set of an infinite set of beneficiaries.

We, the taxpayer, don't need to be funding them.

They should swear off government money, not accept it.

But if they do that, then they have to

cut the cost

that is helping them make all of this money, right?

They've got to work a little harder.

But obviously, they've got the network to pull it off.

I mean, they've raised billions of dollars.

Here's the second bipartisan reform, and this just drives people crazy that this is even going on.

The Department of Education in the past two years admits to overpaying $11 billion worth of student loans and Pell Grants.

The Education Department, obviously, they've got a complete lack of basic in-house financial controls.

Billions of dollars of overpayments are flowing out the door.

They need to stop that.

So wait, so wait, wait.

They're overpaying by how much?

$11 billion over the course of the past two years, and in their own financial documents, they say for 2019, the situation is going to get 4% worse.

What?

Wait a minute.

Wait a minute.

Is there no one honest in this exchange at all?

There's no one at the university who's like, hey, guys, you already paid us for this.

There's no honest broker at all.

There's nobody watching the candy store here at all.

There is nobody.

As a matter of fact, it's 4% of all student loans that were overpaid last year.

And incredibly, 8% of all Pell Grants were overpaid.

Pell Grants don't have to be paid back.

This is obscene.

This is obscene.

Even if you just want to look at it from the number of people that could be educated and with just the money that we already have.

Adam, is there any idea, have you guys looked at all on what this means if we actually go to a socialist system of free education for everybody, what that's going to cost?

So according to Trump's pick for the Fed, economist Stephen Moore, when we penned the piece at the Washington Times, Moore makes the argument that free free college tuition for all, that would be the worst thing

for higher education.

They would have no incentive whatsoever to hone the budget, to cut costs, to use their endowment.

It would all roll back on the American taxpayer.

Moore makes the argument it would be the most regressive policy forcing working and middle-class taxpayers to pay for wealthy kids' college educations.

Just a side note here: any chance that you think he goes to a Fed chair?

I'm rooting for him.

I think he's, you know, the President's staying with him.

He has come under blistering attack.

And from what is being said in the press,

you know, the Republican-controlled Senate,

you know, it sounds like they still support the pick.

And Stephen Moore would be a great addition to the Fed board.

Well, we'd have a little bit of common sense.

You know what he wants?

He told me this the other day on a phone call.

He wants an audit of the Fed.

And I think that's something that all of us us should support.

That would be fantastic.

Adam, thank you so much.

I appreciate it.

God bless.

Thank you, Blenny.

You bet.

The name of the story by Stephen Moore and Adam is The Biggest College Scandal of All

from the Washington Times.

It is well worth the time to read.

The Blaze Radio Network.

On demand.