All points
2116 words
- War has become a major category of online gambling. More than US$1 billion has been wagered this year on military decisions and outcomes, including the war with Iran and the US operation to capture Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro. Bettors worldwide have placed wagers on attack dates, military operations and the fate of political leaders, sometimes with suspicious timing and information unusually specific for outsiders.
- The capture of Nicolás Maduro created an alleged insider-trading case involving a US soldier. On January 3, US special operations forces captured the Venezuelan president in a nighttime operation and transported him to the United States to face drug-trafficking and narco-terrorism charges. The operation subsequently became the subject of a criminal investigation involving someone who had helped plan and execute it.
- Army Master Sergeant Gannon Ken Van Dyke allegedly used classified military intelligence to bet on the Maduro operation. The US Justice Department charged the 38-year-old soldier with using confidential information about the mission to place wagers on when the surprise raid would occur. He pleaded not guilty.
- Van Dyke allegedly turned approximately US$34,000 in wagers into more than US$400,000. His bets included approximately half a dozen placed the day before the raid. According to the indictment, he withdrew his winnings immediately and subsequently attempted to delete his Polymarket betting account.
- Former CFTC lawyer Rob Schwartz considers the alleged conduct an unprecedented form of insider trading. Schwartz, now a private lawyer in Washington, worked for the Commodity Futures Trading Commission until the previous year. He argued that trading on classified intelligence obtained through participation in a military operation is fundamentally comparable to a corporate executive trading on confidential business information. The difference is the source of the privileged information, not the underlying misconduct.
- Polymarket has become a major platform for betting on future events, including military operations. Its markets cover everything from sporting results and political statements to unusual predictions, including whether Jesus will return in 2026. One example involved whether President Trump would say the word "trillion" more than ten times during a 60 Minutes interview; that wager did not pay off. More recently, military contracts have included predictions about attack dates, airspace closures and the transfer of enriched uranium.
- US restrictions on military betting have not prevented Americans from participating. Wagering on military outcomes through platforms such as Polymarket is prohibited in the United States, but digital workarounds remain readily available. Van Dyke allegedly used such a workaround to place his bets.
- Researchers have identified unusually high success rates among supposedly unlikely military bets. Michelle Kendler Kratch and her team at the Anti-Corruption Data Collective examined Polymarket wagers on military outcomes, concentrating on long-shot bets with less than 35% implied odds. These supposedly unlikely wagers won more often than they lost, which Kratch identified as a possible indication of systemic insider trading.
- Military betting reportedly produces a 52% success rate among the examined wagers, compared with 7% for sports betting. The comparison, presented by Kratch, suggests that military bets are performing extraordinarily well relative to conventional probability expectations. The disparity raises questions about whether some participants possess advance information unavailable to ordinary bettors.
- A Paris-based analytics firm identified nine interconnected Polymarket accounts that allegedly generated US$2.4 million from military betting. Nicolas Vaiman's company, Bubble Maps, uses visualisations of trading activity to identify suspicious clusters of accounts. Its head of investigations, known by the online pseudonym Deeds, presented the findings to 60 Minutes and described the pattern as potentially more serious than the Van Dyke case.
- The nine accounts reportedly achieved a 98% winning rate. They wagered almost exclusively on US military operations, collectively making approximately US$2.4 million. By comparison, Van Dyke allegedly earned more than US$400,000. Deeds described the success rate as comparable to winning the lottery repeatedly.
- The interconnected accounts allegedly predicted specific turning points in the Iran war, including events when the betting odds were low. Their successful wagers included the dates of the first US strikes, the removal of Iran's supreme leader and the announcement of a ceasefire. Deeds argued that luck alone could not reasonably explain the pattern.
- Bubble Maps believes the suspicious trading deserves federal investigation. Although the firm's findings were publicly available through its analysis of Polymarket transactions, Deeds questioned whether federal prosecutors were aware of the accounts. He hoped the television investigation would bring the evidence to their attention.
- A Defense Department source reportedly suggested that Van Dyke was only a small part of a much larger problem. According to Deeds, a source familiar with the Van Dyke matter told him there were dozens more people involved in similar activity. The source reportedly described Van Dyke as a small fish.
- Military operations create a much larger pool of potential insiders than the soldiers executing them. Former US military officer Deeb explained that sensitive information can reach government officials, military planners, intelligence analysts and even their spouses. People involved in planning or supporting an operation may learn its timing and objectives before the public does, creating multiple opportunities for confidential information to reach betting markets.
- Suspicious war-related trading is also appearing in traditional commodities markets. The investigation identified concerns about oil futures trading, showing that potential exploitation of military information is not limited to relatively new prediction-market platforms. Traditional commodities exchanges are already subject to financial regulation, but suspicious transactions can still occur.
- Former commodities trader David Covel identified a particularly suspicious oil-market transaction on March 23. Covel, now a New York lawyer representing victims of commodities-market fraud, previously secured the largest whistleblower award for commodities-market manipulation in US history in 2021. He examined trading activity during a period when fighting had already been underway for more than three weeks.
- More than US$800 million was suddenly wagered on falling oil prices approximately 15 minutes before a major Trump announcement. According to trading data supplied to 60 Minutes by financial firm LSEG, oil futures activity had been unusually quiet. At 6:50 a.m., more than US$800 million was positioned around the possibility of oil prices declining.
- Trump's subsequent announcement caused oil prices to fall by more than 10%. Fifteen minutes after the unusual trading activity, Trump posted on Truth Social that the White House and Iran had held "very good and productive conversations" about ending hostilities. The announcement sent oil prices sharply downward, potentially producing profits worth tens of millions of dollars.
- The potential profit from the oil transaction was estimated at as much as US$80 million. Covel described the timing and scale of the transaction as highly suspicious. However, he acknowledged that the trading pattern alone could not establish insider trading without identifying the traders and understanding what information they possessed.
- Federal investigators are examining the suspicious oil trades. 60 Minutes reported that investigators were probing the transactions. Covel explained that regulators could identify the traders by obtaining information from the exchanges. Establishing whether the participants were based in the United States, overseas or connected to a foreign adversary would be essential to determining what happened.
- War betting can create incentives to manipulate journalism and public information. The investigation showed that financial interests can extend beyond trading on confidential military information. When large wagers depend on whether a particular military event is publicly reported, bettors may have a financial incentive to pressure journalists into changing or suppressing accurate reporting.
- Times of Israel military correspondent Emmanuel Fabian was threatened after reporting an Iranian missile strike near Jerusalem. Fabian had written in March about an Iranian missile striking an empty forest. He initially considered the story relatively insignificant, but shortly after publication began receiving messages demanding that he change his reporting.
- The threats against Fabian were explicitly connected to financial losses from Polymarket wagers. One message warned him: "You're going to make us lose $900,000," and threatened to invest even more money to "finish" him. The sender also mentioned details about Fabian's siblings and claimed to know how often he visited his family. Fabian said the threats frightened him.
- The threats concerned a Polymarket contract about whether an Iranian missile would enter Israel on March 10. Fabian investigated the messages and discovered the associated betting market. His report about the missile strike undermined the position of bettors who had wagered that no missile would enter Israel.
- Approximately US$22 million was ultimately wagered on the missile-related market. The initial figure discussed was US$14 million, but Fabian said the total had increased to approximately US$22 million by the time the market closed. He acknowledged some uncertainty about the final figure.
- The person threatening Fabian offered him money to change his reporting. The sender suggested that if Fabian followed instructions and amended the story, he could end up with money in his pocket and the threats would stop. This demonstrated how a betting market could create direct financial pressure on a journalist to alter an accurate account of a military event.
- Fabian refused to change his reporting despite the threats. He expressed concern that other journalists might not withstand similar pressure when substantial sums were involved. In his view, a US$22 million betting market could create powerful incentives for people to compromise their integrity for personal financial gain.
- Fabian reported the threats to police and Polymarket. Polymarket said threatening a journalist was unacceptable and banned the accounts involved. The company also stated that it proactively monitors suspicious activity behind the scenes.
- The Commodity Futures Trading Commission is responsible for policing financial misconduct in these markets. The CFTC, established in the 1970s, oversees commodities and futures trading and is now also central to questions about prediction-market manipulation and insider trading. It is a relatively little-known federal agency with significant responsibilities.
- The CFTC has undergone a substantial reduction in enforcement activity and staffing. Its enforcement actions have fallen by more than two-thirds since 2024, while staffing has also declined sharply. These reductions raise questions about the agency's capacity to investigate increasingly sophisticated forms of market misconduct.
- The CFTC is now led by Michael Selig, a 36-year-old appointed chairman under President Trump. Historically, the agency was led by a five-member commission, but the investigation described it as currently operating under a single leader. Selig had been nominated by Trump the previous autumn.
- Selig publicly promised accountability for fraudulent and manipulative trading. He stated that anyone engaging in fraudulent, manipulative or insider-trading activity would be held accountable to the American people. He declined 60 Minutes' interview request.
- The CFTC says it is rebuilding its enforcement capacity and using artificial intelligence. In response to questions about its reduced staffing and enforcement record, the agency said it was hiring additional employees and deploying AI to identify and pursue bad actors.
- The White House has formally warned government employees against exploiting confidential information on prediction markets. A March memorandum to staffers stated that using non-public information to trade on prediction markets is a criminal offence. This indicates that the administration recognises the potential for government personnel to misuse privileged information for financial gain.
- The investigation raises unresolved questions about where legitimate political or military forecasting ends and illegal insider trading begins. The discussion acknowledged that reasonable people may disagree about precisely where the boundary should be drawn. However, trading on confidential information obtained through privileged government or military access presents a more direct and serious problem than ordinary speculation.
- Insider trading involving military operations could develop into a national security threat. Sources warned that today's financial misconduct could become tomorrow's national security scandal. Suspicious trading patterns are visible to market analysts, but they can also be monitored by foreign governments and hostile intelligence services.
- Foreign adversaries could use betting activity to anticipate American military decisions. If unusual wagers reveal advance knowledge of an impending strike, ceasefire or leadership operation, hostile actors could potentially use those signals to adjust their own military strategies. The same information that creates profits for bettors could expose American plans to adversaries.
- The potential consequences extend beyond financial losses to the safety of military personnel. Information revealed through suspicious betting could compromise operations, help adversaries anticipate military movements and put people's lives at risk. The investigation therefore presents insider trading as more than a financial-regulatory problem.
- The number of insider-trading investigations and prosecutions involving military betting is expected to grow. When asked whether Van Dyke would remain the only person charged a year later, an interviewee predicted that the problem would multiply. The nine connected accounts, the reported existence of dozens of additional potential insiders and the suspicious oil transactions all point to a problem potentially much larger than the first criminal case.