The prediction was explicitly conditional: “unless the Fed steps in here over the weekend, we're going to see … a run on the regional banking system, a cascade like we saw in 2008.” In reality, the Federal Reserve, FDIC, and Treasury did step in on Sunday, March 12, 2023, announcing that all depositors at Silicon Valley Bank and Signature Bank would be fully protected and launching the Bank Term Funding Program to provide liquidity to banks.(fdic.gov)

Because the key condition (“unless the Fed steps in over the weekend”) was not met, we cannot directly observe what would have happened in the absence of intervention. Some regional banks did experience runs and stress — for example, Signature Bank suffered heavy withdrawals before being closed on March 12, and First Republic later failed amid large deposit outflows — but regulators again intervened and contained the fallout, preventing a 2008-style systemic collapse of the entire regional banking system.(fdic.gov)

Since the scenario the prediction was about (no Fed intervention over that weekend) never actually occurred, and the interventions themselves plausibly altered the outcome, the truth of the counterfactual claim (“there would have been* a cascading crisis like 2008 if they hadn’t intervened”) cannot be empirically determined. Hence the result is ambiguous, not demonstrably right or wrong.