On Jan. 3, Donald Trump ordered a military offensive in Venezuela, captured Nicolás Maduro and declared that his administration was “in charge” of the South American country. Three days later, the president announced his intention to sell Venezuelan oil to create a massive pool of money he would distribute at his own discretion.

Soon after, as oil sales began in earnest, Semafor reported something entirely unexpected: Revenue from the sales was going to a bank account in (of all places) Qatar, the Middle Eastern country that recently made headlines in the U.S. for giving Trump a free luxury jet. (The Republican soon after announced a NATO-like security guarantee for Qatar.)

Two weeks later, Secretary of State Marco Rubio confirmed the reporting was accurate. As The New York Times summarized:

Venezuela’s interim government has agreed to submit a monthly ‘budget’ to the Trump administration, which will release money from an account funded by the country’s oil sales and initially managed by Qatar, Secretary of State Marco Rubio said on Wednesday.

But the plan drew sharp questions from skeptical Democrats, and Mr. Rubio conceded that it was ‘novel’ and hastily designed. The role of Qatar — a Middle Eastern country thousands of miles from Venezuela whose ruler has won President Trump’s favor — drew particular criticism from Democrats, who questioned its legality and transparency.

After the secretary of state made some references to oil proceeds being deposited “into an account,” the Florida Republican conceded during an exchange with Democratic Sen. Jeanne Shaheen of New Hampshire that he was referring to an account in Qatar.

The circumstances are head-spinning — and vaguely reminiscent of the Reagan-era Iran-Contra scandal. The U.S. has seized control of a foreign country’s natural resources, is selling those natural resources and collecting revenue from those sales, and is putting that money into an offshore Qatari bank account.

Rubio made no effort to suggest that any of this was normal, just that it’s happening.

To his credit, Democratic Rep. Lloyd Doggett of Texas sent Rubio and Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent a detailed list of questions about this highly irregular situation, including some obvious lines of inquiry, such as “You have stated that Qatar was chosen because it is ‘neutral’ territory. What criteria were used to determine this ‘neutrality’ and the preference of Qatar over other countries?” and “Why did the Administration not choose a country with much stronger banking laws and a history of robust management of oil revenues? For instance, Norway is considered the world leader in financial oversight of oil revenues. Why was a bank account thus not established under Norwegian jurisdiction?”

The Cabinet secretaries have not yet responded. Watch this space.