Gringo Drug Cartel: The Criminal Network in the U.S. That Nobody Wants to See

“Sol Prendido” for Borderland Beat 

Today, I have the privilege—the honor—of sharing this table with one of the journalists I admire most, and who is, moreover, a true master in many respects. And setting aside that praise—which might sound like flattery, though I say it with all my heart—Jesús Esquivel is perhaps one of the most knowledgeable experts regarding the relationship between Mexico and the United States in matters of security. Furthermore, for undertaking the project he just completed—*Los Cárteles Gringos* (The Gringo Cartels)—is no small feat.

Yes, we talk about El Chapo; yes, we talk about Ovidio; yes, we talk about El Mayo; yes, we talk about El Mencho, and La Familia Michoacana, and whomever else you might care to name. But it’s true: there are "Gringo cartels." And these Gringo cartels operate, and they bribe, and they generate significant problems—yet it’s a subject that hardly anyone wants to discuss.

Jesús, it is an honor to have you in this space. I say that with the utmost admiration. Congratulations on the book. How are you? Very well, Luis. Thank you so much for the invitation. Listen, you’re making quite a splash with this book. Why focus on the Gringo cartels? Do they, too, bear a significant share of the responsibility?

Well, yes—because, first of all, this work serves as an update to a previous book of mine, *Los Narcos Gringos* (The Gringo Narcos), which was published nearly ten years ago. At that time, these groups lacked the structure, the logistical capabilities, and the organization they possess today. Back then—and this was indeed true—they functioned merely as intermediaries for the distribution and sale of drugs within the United States. However, the emergence of manufactured opioids—specifically those containing fentanyl—fundamentally transformed the market; and not just the market itself, but also the entire infrastructure involved in the movement of narcotics.

Consequently, within the United States—after years of these groups working primarily on behalf of Mexican cartels (and doing so without any true loyalty, simply selling their services to the highest bidder—pure capitalism, essentially)—they came to realize the pressing need—the absolute urgency—to become more independent and to evolve into distinct, self-contained entities capable of generating greater profits. Moreover, this arrangement also suits the Mexican cartels well, given the risks they face in the United States—specifically, the risk of being arrested or having their operational cells dismantled. The reality is nothing like the picture painted by the Department of Justice—the notion that the United States is being "invaded" by representatives of Mexican cartels—as is implied in the annual drug threat assessment maps they publish.

This raises a logical question: Well, if they have these individuals located and identified within the United States, why don't they arrest them? The fact is, they *do* arrest them. What is actually happening here is that the U.S. government itself recognized this situation; consequently, an initiative was established within the Department of Justice—specifically by the DEA—to combat *domestic* cartels.

That is the term they used. The "cartel" label wasn't my invention; *they* were the ones who applied the "cartel" label to motorcycle clubs. Okay? And to gang members—who are the individuals that actually make up these cartels, Luis. In other words, we’re talking about a scenario where Mexican cartels transport the product into the United States, but once it arrives, a *separate* infrastructure takes over to determine how it will be distributed and what will be done with it—an infrastructure that no longer answers directly to the cartels in Sinaloa or Jalisco.

Let me give you an example—that is, perhaps a cartel dominates a certain part of the United States, but its dominance consists merely of delivering the product there; the actual distribution, sales, and profits then belong to a different cartel. It doesn't even go beyond a specific point—just to the southern border, right up to the frontier—and from there on out, they're on their own.

Think of it like a corporate delivery service: a company ships products to vendors in a marketplace, and those vendors take charge of distributing and managing the goods. It’s not like it used to be. Nowadays, the shipment arrives at the border, and these other cartels—let's put it this way so the audience understands—buy it in bulk: say, a ton of synthetic drugs.

"You deliver it to this specific point on the border"—says the Mexican cartel—"and you have a specific timeframe in which to pay me." "Okay." The group purchasing the shipment then takes responsibility for the transport, distribution, and sales; for setting the price; for laundering the money; and for paying the Mexican cartel the agreed-upon amount.

And they end up keeping the entire, massive profit for themselves. As you can see, this entails far less risk for the Mexican cartels—groups that have always managed to stay one step ahead of the authorities. So, who is actually more dangerous at this particular juncture? After all, the Mexican cartels are currently being singled out—even by Homeland Security—amid fears that they’re about to start deploying drones to kill Americans, or that they’re planning an invasion—as if we’re surely going to march in waving the flag of the Jalisco New Generation Cartel!

But tell me—based on your research and the testimonies you’ve gathered (particularly those from DEA agents, who revealed a great deal to you)—who are the truly dangerous ones? I mean, they have guns over there, too; they carry out executions over there, too; and people are dying every single day over there, just the same.

The trouble is that the media—specifically the major news outlets—don't attach any significance to these incidents because they remain stuck in the mindset that this is merely "street violence." But if they were to investigate the victims—and, more importantly, the perpetrators—they would begin to uncover the underlying connections: *Which group did the victim belong to? Which motorcycle club?* Who killed him? Which gang was he from?

Now, the major difference remains that, over there, there isn't a single capo commanding a group—say, a motorcycle club or a street gang—because they operate through a sort of branching structure; they have various chapters or clubs that all fall under the same "patch," so to speak. Take the Hells Angels, for instance: they have a presence across the entire United States, yet there is no single, overarching boss.

In every city—in every state—where this motorcycle club has a chapter, they have their own president and vice president. The famous Hells Angels, right? They operate independently, though they know of one another; crucially, however, they don’t answer to a single supreme leader, and that makes them far more sophisticated. Why? Because if there *were* a single boss for the Hells Angels across the entire U.S., it would be incredibly easy to identify him—you’d simply go straight to him and "cut off the head of the snake."

In this case, however, you’re dealing with *many* snakes—all of whom happen to wear the same jersey. Let’s put it in soccer terms: it’s as if the Hells Angels chapter in Fresno were competing—in a sense—against the Hells Angels chapter in Atlanta. Sure, they might compete, but they aren't enemies—at least, not unless they start stealing from one another.

Their true enemies are the *other* motorcycle clubs operating throughout the country. You mentioned the DEA. John Callery was the chief—the man in charge of the initiative specifically designed to combat domestic cartels. He was allocated a budget; he was assigned agents; the entire operation was approved by the U.S. Congress.

It wasn't a secret; the information was right there in the public record. The media either failed to notice it, or—if they *did* notice—they simply chose to ignore it. Do you see what I mean? After all, even John Callery himself has stated that the White House was fully aware of this situation—and that the vast majority—the *overwhelming* majority—of these domestic cartels are comprised of white men.

Yes, exactly. You either don't want to touch them, or you want to let them grow—up to a certain point, anyway. But where exactly do you draw the line? Because—let me ask you this, since you bring it up in the book—how much do the "Gringo cartels" earn in comparison to the Mexican cartels, in terms of billions of dollars?

I mean, in that regard, I do believe the Mexican cartels remain the more powerful force, don't they? They allow us to grow only up to a certain point—depending, of course, on how one chooses to crunch the numbers. Right. Because there are so many players involved in the United States that, for the cartels, that country remains the ultimate market, doesn't it?

And as I was saying—take the Jalisco Cartel, for instance: they tell their partners, "You hand over this specific quantity to me in exchange for this." Of course, the buyers then mark up the price—sometimes tripling it—to cover transportation, logistics, and all those associated costs. But it isn't just a single cartel that pockets those profits; the money gets distributed—it’s parceled out. When you add it all up, it’s essentially a free market, isn't it?

Pure capitalism. Pure capitalism. Exactly. I mean, the sums involved are absolutely stratospheric. Now, that said, there are far too many tentacles of corruption involved, because the buyers have to pay the Mexican cartels in cash. They are the ones who "bring down the money"—as the saying goes in the jargon of the drug trade.

They are the ones laundering it through U.S. banks and financial institutions—institutions that are involved; of course they are involved in the remittance trade. That is the key. But here in Mexico, bringing up the subject of remittances to the government touches a raw nerve, because they don't want to admit it—and mind you, I’m not claiming that *all* remittances come from drug trafficking; there are legitimate remittances, too.

Yes, a portion certainly does—and we don't know just how large that portion is. The key—and the complicated part—is that you can make as many transfers as you want in a single day—as many as you’re able to, or as many as your funds allow—up to $10,000 each time, without U.S. banks ever asking you about the source of that money. You could use 50 different institutions; you send $50,000, right? What is 50 times 10? Half a million dollars. Half a million dollars.

$500,000—and nobody asks you a thing. Just like that, the cash is out. They use that money to pay off the Mexican cartels. Yes, to consolidate all those funds. But just imagine—I’m only talking about 50 institutions here. Right. Yeah. And that could be happening in just a single city. How many institutions are there in total? Across the whole country? Yes. Plus, you can recruit an army of people—paying them $300 or $500 each—just to carry out a transfer on your behalf.

We saw this happen just the other day here, Jesús: in the State of Mexico, authorities launched an operation against *La Familia Michoacana* and other groups. The townspeople rose up against the police and disarmed them. They shouted things like, "We *are* La Familia Michoacana here! *So-and-so* runs this town!"—and this was happening during an operation specifically aimed at combating extortion. I mean... it just goes to show: you really *can* dominate entire towns.

Here in Mexico, the cartels *do* dominate towns—and those remittances are precisely what fund that dominance, even if the money is ostensibly being sent to pay for something else. Yes. And furthermore, there is one very significant point to consider:

The U.S. government refuses to talk about this. On that front, at least, things are crystal clear. They’ve mentioned it in hearings, but they don’t take any further action because they know that—directly or indirectly—if the OFAC, the Treasury Department, and all its agencies were to uncover and curb this activity, it would strip banks of enormous profits.

On average—I asked Gerardo Esquivel, the former Deputy Governor of the Bank of Mexico, not long ago—how much U.S. banks actually pocket in commissions from the global remittance market. And he told me, "Roughly a billion dollars a year, son." I mean, they’re not about to let that kind of cash slip through their fingers. Right?

But beyond that, just imagine the implications for the stock markets if it were revealed that these major U.S. institutions are entangled in drug trafficking and money laundering. And there are plenty of other ways that American cartels launder money. You need warehouses, Luis, to move the drugs.

Of course—they buy houses; the real estate sector is deeply involved, isn't it? I mean, it’s incredibly complex and highly sophisticated. That’s why I believe that—even though the level of lethality in our country is horrific, truly ghastly, with people getting beheaded or hacked to pieces—

Yes, in the United States—I repeat—they still view it merely as street violence stemming from drug dealing; just a turf war between gangs, you know? Here, when it comes to gangs—well, three guys turn up dead, murdered, and the assumption is simply that they were fighting over retail drug sales.

But they should investigate: who are these guys? Which organization do they belong to? For several years, I was compiling indictments—working blindly, really—and I ended up buried under a mountain of documents involving Americans, because I was focusing exclusively on U.S. nationals. Eventually, while preparing this project, I asked the publisher: "What should we do? Should we stick to the most current cases?"

And throughout all that research, I hadn't actually come across a single relevant case—which is why, well, I wasn't able to include any. It takes an army of people to cover it all—there are simply too many federal courts, with thousands upon thousands of cases every single day. I hadn't managed to find a case involving a federal agent—especially one linked to fentanyl, which is the very argument the U.S. government uses to justify its actions—until luck finally smiled upon me. A friend who works for the Border Patrol—whom I had called just to say hello—asked me, "So, what are you working on these days?"

I told her, "Hey, well, I'm writing this book." As it turned out, she was investigating corruption *within* the Border Patrol, and she handed me the case file on a U.S. federal agent who was trafficking fentanyl. They are being bribed by Mexican cartels—specifically named individuals, complete with their full names.

It’s no longer just the Mexican cartels doing the bribing; now, it’s *them*—the agents themselves. The fact is, they make an astronomical amount of money. Listen—what you’re saying here, and what those folks from the DEA were telling you, actually ties into something else. It might sound like a conspiracy theory—or whatever else you want to call it—but it really does have to do with the fact that a large portion of the members of these cartels are white.

Yes, absolutely. I mean, there are TV series and movies out there that practically serve as an ode to motorcycle clubs, aren't there? There are so many people who aspire to grow old—or at least reach a certain age—buy themselves a Harley-Davidson, and just hit the road. Just observe them; look at their sheer size, the expressions on their faces—they’re enough to scare the living daylights out of you.

I mean, it’s not like I’m saying *everyone* is involved—mind you, certainly not—but if they *are* involved, well, then they are. Anyway—not everyone, of course—but about... I don't know, I'm pretty sure it’s been about ten years now—this TV series came out: *Sons of Anarchy*. Yeah. Very good, by the way.

All white guys, and every single one of them knee-deep in drugs—in drug trafficking. They clearly knew a thing or two already. And I mean, that’s Hollywood production for you. Later on, they made a more recent one—though that one really leaned into the racism. Naturally—as is always the case in the U.S.—*Mayans M.C.* Yeah, exactly. And with the Mayans—since they were of Mexican descent, set in California, and depicted digging tunnels and doing other nonsense like that (which they don't actually do—*that* part is pure fiction)—it still gave you glimpses of what’s actually going on, and how there are corrupt agents involved.

I just finished watching a series called *Waterfront*—though I didn't think it was all that good. Hmm. Everyone in it was white—yep, all white; every last one of them. Corruption, drug dealing... and then a DEA agent shows up who isn't just a heroin addict, but corrupt as well—and he ends up dying of an overdose.

Not all of this is fiction. *Los cárteles gringos* [The Gringo Cartels] is available in all bookstores. In all bookstores, and in every format. Uh, there’s an audiobook version... Yes, audiobook and e-book. Did *you* listen to the audiobook? I actually recorded it myself. *You* recorded it? No. Oh, right. No, someone else recorded it. Yeah. But anyway, it is absolutely worth checking out.

A large portion of our audience here uses—and consumes—a lot of audiobooks, so it is indeed available in audiobook format, as well as in digital and print versions. It’s well worth the read. It even includes the famous photo of John Callery—just so you can see that, well... it’s all *on the record*, you know? That way, no one can come along later and say, "Well, where is it?"—or claim that you made it all up, or that it’s just pure speculation—the whole nine yards. Let's see... right now, for our friends on YouTube, let's see if we can pull it up; if not, we'll upload it shortly. What did John Kerry say to you about the book?

Look, regarding the book, he hasn't actually seen it yet—obviously, since I didn't have any copies on hand—but he was absolutely delighted that, for the very first time, someone was talking about this initiative that he spearheaded. [Mm-hmm.] An initiative that was right there, in plain sight for everyone to see, yet no one touched it—no one did a thing about it. I’ll wrap things up today by asking you this, Jesús: are they actually going to do anything?

I mean, regarding the narrative—speaking of TV series—regarding the *Lions* narrative, for instance, right? The one where Mexicans are portrayed as being in league with our enemies—where Mexicans are supposedly trying to invade us. Are they going to do anything about that?

Well, yes and no. Look, a few days ago—and I’m bringing up this specific example because people tend not to notice it—everyone talks about the "violent groups." And that’s exactly why I mentioned that they created this initiative: to label those groups specifically as "cartels" because of the violence.

Because that’s a whole different ballgame. You can sell drugs and just be a regular street dealer; but if you start killing people—and if you’ve established a larger organizational structure or infrastructure—then you’ve become something else entirely.

Remember when Trump said that Mexican politicians and government officials were "terrified"—or I can't recall the exact word he used... "terrorized," perhaps—by these groups? He mentioned that specifically, and then he added: "And *we*—*we* are here fighting against these violent groups." And *that* is the part that tends to go unnoticed.

Look, regarding the violent groups—the cartels—he doesn't actually call them cartels, because he’s not stupid. Those violent groups don't vote for him. In fact, surely *more* of them do—I mean, forget it, there are so many of them; they are legion. And—I’m going to be politically incorrect here, okay?—what about the "Rednecks" crowd? Come on, you mean to tell me *they* didn't vote for him?

Well, yes, they surely *did* vote for him. But just look at—let's call it—the deceptive nature of that argument: "violent groups." He said it himself, and now they’re repeating it constantly. Pan Bondi said it right there in Congress. What does it cost them to just say it? That’s precisely why the person who spearheaded this initiative—Jack Riley—when he presented his testimony to Congress to get this initiative passed... well, in the interview I conducted with him, I asked: "Why didn't you just say 'cartels' back then?"

"Well," he replied, "because that would have spooked them, and they wouldn't have given us the funding." Indeed. Jesús, it is an honor to have you on this show. I mean that sincerely, with the utmost admiration. Thank you for your work, Jesús. Thank you very much. No, thank *you* for the invitation, Luis. Thank you so much. Go get the book—it’s available everywhere. *The Gringo Cartels*. 

May I mention that the book presentation is taking place today at 7:00 PM? Yes, yes, absolutely. At the Rosario Castellanos Bookstore. At Rosario Castellanos—today, at 7:00 PM. Anyone who would like to attend will find Jesús Esquivel there, presenting *The Gringo Cartels*. Wishing you every success, as always—thank you very much. 

Source: MVS Noticias