February 18, 2026 – In a lively, wide-ranging conversation on The Megyn Kelly Show, Megyn Kelly interviewed Buck Sexton, co-host of The Clay Travis and Buck Sexton Show and author of the new book Manufacturing Delusion: How the Left Uses Brainwashing, Indoctrination, and Propaganda Against You.

The interview landed right as the book was released on February 17, 2026. Throughout the discussion, Sexton argued that parts of the political left push coordinated messaging that pulls people away from objective reality.

Sexton, who previously worked as a CIA analyst focused on jihadi terror networks, said these methods resemble the persuasion tactics used by authoritarian movements in the past.

In his view, today’s flashpoints, from gender ideology to racial narratives, spread less like organic cultural change and more like results of nonstop messaging, social pressure, and influence inside major institutions.

Sexton Main Claim to Megyn Kelly: Building a Shared Delusion

Early on, Sexton explained why he chose the title Manufacturing Delusion. He told Kelly that the “manufacturing” comes from people seeking broad control, not honest debate. In other words, he believes brainwashing and indoctrination can shape public belief at scale, then reward compliance.

Here are the main themes he raised:

• Brainwashing and indoctrination tools: Sexton said repeated talking points across media, schools, and corporate settings can train people to accept ideas that clash with common sense or biology.
• How propaganda works over time: He argued that constant exposure makes extreme positions feel normal, while disagreement starts to look dangerous or unacceptable.
• “Weaponized kindness”: Sexton used this phrase to describe how compassion can become a pressure tactic, especially in debates about transgender issues and racial equity demands.

Kelly challenged him on how these trends play out in everyday life. They also discussed how hardline messaging can shut down debate and deepen division across the political spectrum.

Past Examples of Mass Persuasion

A large part of the interview focused on history. Sexton leaned on past cases to argue that mass belief shaping isn’t new.

He pointed to several comparisons:

• 20th-century totalitarian states: Sexton cited Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union as examples of systems that used propaganda offices and re-education to enforce strict ideology. He said people learned to repeat claims that served the state, even when they were absurd.
• Cult-style recruitment: Drawing on his CIA experience, he compared modern political pressure to jihadi recruitment, where groups used isolation, repetition, and identity binding to reshape how recruits saw the world.
• Orwell’s warning signs: Sexton referenced George Orwell’s 1984 and the “2+2=5” idea, saying social and career pressure can push people to accept obvious falsehoods.

He also argued that once enough people adopt the preferred story, the system starts to police itself. Those who resist may face shaming, cancellation, or professional fallout, which then pushes others to stay quiet.

Why Group Pressure Works

Kelly and Sexton also talked about why people go along with groupthink. They agreed that conforming can feel safer because it offers belonging and protection from backlash. Still, they said the costs can be serious.

• A shift in what people call “real”: Sexton argued that as more people repeat the same lines, society starts treating dissent as “hate speech” or “disinformation,” even when it’s grounded in facts.
• Real-world outcomes: He pointed to the defund-the-police movement and debates over redefining gender, arguing that these ideas can lead to higher crime and worsening mental health.
• Spillover effects on the right: Sexton added that conservatives can get pulled into the cycle, too. In his view, extreme claims on race or trans issues can spark overcorrections that raise the temperature even more.

At one point, he framed the threat as internal. He said the biggest danger isn’t an outside invasion, it’s the slow breakdown of rational thinking at home.

Current Examples and a Call to Pay Attention

Later, the discussion moved to recent news, including shootings involving individuals identified as trans. Sexton tied those cases to what he called cultural confusion, where affirmation replaces treatment and honest diagnosis. He again criticized “weaponized kindness,” saying it can put ideology ahead of mental health.

Kelly also brought up passages where Sexton describes COVID-era rules as another example of a “manufactured delusion.” He argued that elites and left-leaning institutions used fear and pressure to drive compliance.

To push back, Sexton urged people to stay alert, think clearly, and refuse to self-censor. He said his book aims to help readers recognize manipulation tactics and hold their ground when social pressure rises.

Why the Conversation Hits a Nerve Now

With cultural conflicts growing sharper, Sexton’s Manufacturing Delusion positions itself as a direct warning about propaganda, indoctrination, and political brainwashing. Published by Penguin Random House and promoted by voices like Glenn Beck and Jack Carr, the book mixes intelligence-style analysis, historical examples, and commentary on today’s debates.

The interview’s takeaway was simple: if people don’t notice how these narratives get built and repeated, shared reality can crack. Sexton’s message to viewers was to spot the pattern early, before it becomes the new normal.

Trending News:

Accusations Fly Over Alleged Zionist Takeover of (TPUSA) Turning Point USA

WASHINGTON, D.C. –  President Donald Trump is drawing strong reactions after moving forward with a major campaign pledge, releasing government-held records tied to the late financier and convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein.

The decision has traveled fast through political and media circles, not only in the United States but also overseas.

Attorney General Pam Bondi, a longtime Trump ally, notified Congress in a formal letter that the Department of Justice (DOJ) has released all Epstein-related records in its possession.

Bondi said the release covers records, documents, communications, and investigative materials connected to Epstein’s cases. The disclosure follows the Epstein Files Transparency Act, which Trump signed into law on November 19, 2025.

According to the DOJ announcement, the public dump includes more than 3.5 million pages, over 2,000 videos, and 180,000 images.

The scale has fueled a split response. Supporters call it a rare show of openness in a case surrounded by suspicion for years. Meanwhile, critics, including some Democrats and some victim advocates, argue the release still falls short.

They say heavy redactions, missing materials, and the lack of a clear “client list” leave the public without firm answers, and they also note that no immediate wave of prosecutions followed.

Trump’s Campaign Promise Turns Into Policy

During the campaign, Trump repeatedly said he would declassify and release Epstein-related files. He framed the move as a way to expose elite wrongdoing and alleged cover-ups.

Although Trump initially raised concerns about the law’s impact on presidential investigations, he later signed the bipartisan bill after pressure from victims, Republican lawmakers (including Rep. Thomas Massie), and public demand.

Trump has described the release as unmatched transparency and praised Bondi’s role in managing it. His supporters point to the sheer volume of material and contrast it with what they view as earlier reluctance to disclose Epstein’s network.

To comply, the DOJ said it carried out a wide review process. The department assigned more than 500 attorneys to search and assess records across multiple matters. Those included the Florida and New York Epstein cases, Ghislaine Maxwell’s prosecution, and inquiries tied to Epstein’s death.

What the DOJ Released

• Scope and access: The DOJ made the materials available in searchable, downloadable form on its website at justice.gov/epstein. The files cover areas such as flight logs, travel records, interviews, emails, and media tied to Epstein and Maxwell.
• Redactions: The DOJ kept some information under seal or blacked out under legal requirements and court orders. The stated goal is to protect victims and prevent unnecessary privacy harm.
• List of high-profile names: Bondi and Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche also gave Congress a list of more than 300 “politically exposed persons” and government officials who appear in, or are referenced by, the documents. The DOJ noted that appearances vary widely. Some entries reflect direct contact with Epstein or Maxwell, while others come from news clippings or passing mentions.

The list includes well-known figures across politics, business, and entertainment, including:

• President Donald Trump (described as having past social ties, with no accusations of wrongdoing in the document’s framing; Trump has denied involvement and says the records clear him)
• Former President Bill Clinton
• Bill Gates
• Prince Andrew (Duke of York)
• Barack and Michelle Obama
• Prince Harry
• Mark Zuckerberg
• Woody Allen
• Bruce Springsteen
• Others in entertainment, business, and politics

The list also stresses that a person’s inclusion does not prove misconduct. In many cases, the reference is not presented as incriminating.

Worldwide Response, Renewed Pressure, and More Scrutiny

After the release, public attention shifted quickly from the files themselves to what they might mean for powerful people who once crossed paths with Epstein. The ripple effects have reached from Westminster to Florida and Washington, with heavy coverage across Europe and beyond.

• Resignations and new reviews: Some people have faced calls to step away from boards, advisory posts, or other roles. In addition, several international officials and business figures have seen renewed media and regulatory attention.
• Congress ramps up oversight: Tense hearings followed, with Bondi facing sharp questions from Democrats. Critics accused the DOJ of incomplete transparency, flawed redactions that exposed victims in some places, and possible shielding of influential names. Rep. Jamie Raskin and others pointed to unredacted references involving powerful individuals.
• Victims and advocates speak out: Some survivors criticized parts of the release as reckless. They called for clearer protections, fuller disclosures, and the release of materials they believe are still missing, including alleged prosecution memos.
• International focus returns: In the United Kingdom, attention returned to Prince Andrew. Meanwhile, tech and finance circles again faced questions about past ties to Epstein.

So far, the release has not produced a broad set of new indictments. Still, the new public record has driven talk of further investigations into potential co-conspirators.

Applause and Backlash, Often Along Party Lines

Trump allies describe the disclosure as proof he followed through on a pledge to expose entrenched power. Conservative media, including Fox News, highlighted Bondi’s announcement as a win for transparency.

On the other hand, critics argue the effort is incomplete. Some lawmakers say redactions protect certain people, deadlines slipped, and the rollout favors political theater over justice. At the same time, online speculation continues, with calls for more records and fewer blackouts.

Bondi has defended the DOJ’s approach. She says the department met the law’s requirements while following court orders and protecting victims. Trump has also posted that the released files “conclusively” clear him.

What Happens Next

Attention is now turning to what comes after the release:

• New calls to investigate credible leads found in the documents
• Congressional efforts to push for additional disclosures or outside review
• Continued debate over transparency and privacy in high-profile criminal cases

The Epstein case has long drawn distrust and intense interest. This latest release changes the public record in a big way, but it also sets up the next fight over what remains hidden, what matters most, and what accountability should look like.

Related News:

New Report Gives Trump an Economic Win as Inflation Cools to 2.4%

Trump’s 2006 Call to Police About Epstein Dispels Mainstream Media Narrative

MUNICH, Germany, February 15, 2026, a panel meant to focus on Western unity at the Munich Security Conference turned tense on Saturday. Czech Deputy Prime Minister and Foreign Minister Petr Macinka confronted former U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton after she sharply criticized U.S. President Donald Trump and touched on wider culture and values debates.

The exchange took place during a session titled “The West-West Divide: What Remains of Common Values.” It put a spotlight on growing stress inside the transatlantic alliance. Populism, cultural policy fights, and continued support for Ukraine all sat at the center of the dispute.

Macinka, speaking for a view heard more often in Central Europe, pushed for more respectful talk. At the same time, he pushed back on what he called reckless name-calling in politics.

What Set It Off: Clinton Targets Trump

Clinton opened with a strong warning about Trump’s approach to foreign policy. She said his actions weaken core Western values, human rights, NATO, and the broader transatlantic partnership. In her view, his style of leadership risks copying systems built on unchecked power. She also argued that it could undercut shared security efforts, including steady support for Ukraine as it fights Russia.

She framed Ukraine’s defense as bigger than borders. According to Clinton, the war also tests democratic principles that Western countries claim to share. She also tied cultural disputes at home to bigger security stakes abroad. Because of that, she rejected the idea that internal disagreements should lead to reduced aid for Kyiv.

Macinka Fires Back With His Own Argument

Macinka answered by defending parts of Trump’s agenda as a real response to public frustration. He said many voters see some elite policies as far removed from everyday life. In his view, that gap helped drive Trump’s rise.

He also attacked what he called the “woke revolution.” Along the way, he criticized parts of the “gender revolution” and what he described as “climate alarmism.” Macinka took a strict line on biology, saying there are “male and female.”

He also questioned why these topics get so much attention while security threats keep growing.

As Clinton pressed him on what “gender” rights he meant, and whether those debates could ever justify pulling back from Ukraine, Macinka insisted on finishing his point. “Can I finish my point? I’m sorry it makes you nervous,” he said, pointing to interruptions he felt blocked open discussion.

Macinka also called out Clinton’s obvious dislike of Trump, saying, “I think you really don’t like him.” Clinton agreed without hesitation. “That is absolutely true,” she replied, then added that she opposed him because she believes his actions harm the United States and global stability.

A Push for Cooler Heads and Less Name-Calling

One of the loudest moments came when Macinka urged Western leaders, including those in Europe, to lower the temperature. He argued that political rivals should not be treated like “public enemies.” Instead, he called for calmer, more useful conversation.

He also criticized how quickly people toss around labels like “fascism” and “Nazism.” Those terms, he said, belong to a brutal history that ended decades ago. In his view, using them loosely weakens their meaning and poisons debate.

Accounts from the room say Macinka kept pressing for real listening, not shouting matches. In a clip that spread quickly online, he reportedly told Clinton or the panel, “First Learn How To Talk.” The line summed up his frustration and served as a public call for basic civility in high-pressure forums.

With global security leaders watching, the panel showed the “West-West divide” in plain view. On one side sit liberal internationalists who stress shared democratic norms and alliances. On the other hand are populist-leaning voices who distrust unchecked globalization, identity politics, and large foreign commitments.

Macinka’s approach matches a rising mood in parts of Central and Eastern Europe. Many leaders there stay firmly anti-Russian, yet they also resist what they see as Western cultural pressure. His defense of some Trump-style ideas also reflected a hard-nosed belief that only tough U.S. pressure might force Moscow to shift on Ukraine.

Clinton pushed back by linking culture and foreign policy. In her view, abandoning Ukraine would betray the freedoms the West claims to defend, including basic rights that also come up in domestic debates.

Fallout and What It Could Mean

The confrontation spread fast online, with short clips drawing strong reactions. Supporters praised Macinka for speaking plainly and defending what they see as common sense. Critics said he brushed off progressive concerns and sounded too friendly toward Trump.

At the 2026 Munich Security Conference, the clash became a clear sign of wider transatlantic strain. NATO still faces hard questions about burden sharing, Ukraine aid fatigue, and cultural rifts. Because of that, moments like this show how hard unity can be when politics turns personal.

For Petr Macinka, the exchange raised his profile beyond Czech politics, placing him as a louder voice for pragmatic conservatism in European diplomacy. Whether it helps close gaps or deepens them is still unknown. Even so, the Munich confrontation already stands out as a defining scene from the conference.

As leaders continue talks in Bavaria, one point sits in plain view. Shared threats are not enough on their own. Western cohesion also depends on the calmer, more respectful dialogue Macinka demanded.

Related News:

Democrats Turn Their Backs on Bill and Hillary Clinton

Hillary Clinton Calls for Transparency, Wants Televised Congressional Hearing