Sanctuary Cities, Drug Cartels, and No Kings

[Da Lat]

.

Sanctuary Cities, Drug Cartels, and No Kings

By Christopher Chantrill
Oct. 20, 2025

Every now and again in this world of unknowing, we get a glance at reality in a blinding flash of light. For instance, I have been wondering about the Feds arresting drug gang members in various blue cities. What was that all about? Then I read Instapundit Glenn Reynolds’ regular piece in the NY Post, and now everything makes sense. I wrote it up in my Substack.

Did you know that the whole Sanctuary City grift is needed because our blue cities have a longstanding relationship between the drug cartels and the politicians? Here’s how it works in Chicago, according to an article in Chicago magazine back in 2011:

While they typically deny it, many public officials -- mostly, but not limited to, aldermen, state legislators, and elected judges -- routinely seek political support from influential street gangs… Gangs can provide a decisive advantage at election time by performing the kinds of chores patronage armies once did.
[There’s] the steady and largely secret flow of money from gang leaders to certain politicians and vice versa… In turn, grateful politicians use their payrolls or campaign funds to hire gang members, pull strings for them to get jobs or contracts, or offer other favors[.]
[S]ome politicians ignore the gangs’ criminal activities. Some go so far as to protect gangs from the police, tipping them off to impending raids or to surveillance activities[.]

You can see the advantage of Sanctuary City status to blue city movers and shakers. It means that the politicians can protect the drug cartels that get them elected and get access to their money without the Feds nosing in on the action between local politicians and drug lords.

And did you know that Chicago was the third city in the nation to declare itself a Sanctuary City -- back in 1985?

It all makes sense. Sanctuary Cities are just politics as usual. The politicians use the gangs to turn out the vote, and the gangs use the politicians for a bunch of reasons, mostly to provide protection for their drug business. The Sanctuary City designation is a false front. It lets the politicians do some virtue-signaling about poor helpless migrants, and it provides an excuse to forbid their law-enforcement agencies from cooperating with the Feds and disrupting the operations of the gangs as they peddle drugs to the welfare cheats and exchange favors with the politicians.

Really, you have to award the politicians a Gold Star for creativity. They bellow their virtue to the reverberate hills, because helpless migrants, and guess what: the nice liberal ladies, the kind that turn out at No Kings protests, actually believe the lie they are peddling. Bless their hearts.

Experts are currently researching whether the drug cartels are in on the various federal and state government programs to assist undocumented immigrants, from migrant hotels to health care to cash to food to legal assistance. Experts are divided on how the loot is divided between cartels, elected politicians, NGO grantees, and ordinary government administrators.

It all seems like chaos, from Sanctuary Cities, to Schumer Shutdowns, to No Kings mostly peaceful protests, to Helen Andrews’ warning on the Great Feminization.

If we are worried by chaos, think of the situation of our liberal friends! Sen. Chuck proclaimed a shutdown and nobody came. After 50 years of a glorious career as an elected ballet dancer, doing his world famous electoral jeté from state assembly to Congress to the Senate without so much as a misstep, Schumer is facing humiliation from the double tour en l'air of a former bartender.

Our liberal friends are humiliated every day by a low-rent real-estate oligarch who negotiates peace deals way better than their beloved and credentialed foreign-policy experts.

Then there’s the crisis in the Chardonnay set. Helen Andrews describes the defenestration of Larry Summers from the presidency of Harvard:

“When he started talking about innate differences in aptitude between men and women, I just couldn’t breathe because this kind of bias makes me physically ill,” said Nancy Hopkins, a biologist at MIT.

You see what is going on here? Nancy Hopkins is performing a double-blind experiment of my scientific theory that “women expect to be protected.” In her case she expects to be protected from the scientific fact that

female underrepresentation in hard sciences was partly due to “different availability of aptitude at the high end” as well as taste differences between men and women “not attributable to socialization.”

Women expect to be protected, from men and by men.

I sympathize, dear liberal friends. For over a hundred years you got to run the table. Now you find yourselves behind the 8-ball, and you can’t believe it.

I say that we should be merciful with our liberal friends and invite them out for a brewski or a box of Chardonnay. Alas, dear liberal friends, your day is done -- and especially your corrupt stitch-up with the drug cartels.

Christopher Chantrill @CHRISchantrill blogs at The Commoner Manifesto and runs the go-to site on US government finances, usgovernmentspending .com. Also get his American Manifesto and his Road to the Middle Class.


---------------

Source: American Thinker
Link: https://www.americanthinker.com/arti..._no_kings.html






.