Wouldn't the counterargument to this be that if the poor grunt is willing to betray his country for money in the prediction market, he would also be willing to take money from enemy x to do the same thing?

With the prediction market, there is a financial incentive for people on the opposite side of the bet being motivated to uncover the malfeasance.

If you're a grunt trying to contact Russia or china you're much more likely to end up talking to an FBI agent posing as a foreigner. Prediction markets make it easy and anonymous.

A good general rule is to make it hard for people to do bad things, and to not create incentives to do so. This seems to do the opposite.

I think doing war crimes is the real betrayal of the country. But we have a president who think his personal morality is superior to international law, ratified treaties (despite the supremacy clause) and so on. This is overtly and explicitly unconstitutional.

> he would also be willing to take money from enemy x to do the same thing?

The prediction market is the mechanism by which this happens.

Nobody is going to uncover anything on bets when they're done an hour before the event happens. This isn't the stock market and trying to connect it to what happens on the stock market makes no sense.