Milei and LIBRA: Fraud, Connections and Potential Liability

The scandal of POUND has ceased to be a simple anecdote of political malpractice and has become a time bomb for the administration of Javier Milei.

It is no longer just about the irresponsible promotion of a financial asset; New revelations indicate that there is a network of connections between the president and the architects of LIBRA, raising suspicions about his role in this case.

The article from La Nación (February 15, 2025)

reveals previous meetings between Milei and the creators of LIBRA, while the statement from the Argentine Fintech Chamber attempts to distance the sector from this scandal, suggesting that even within the crypto world there is concern about the legal consequences.

If before there were doubts about whether LIBRA was an error or fraud, there are now concrete indications that it was a premeditated operation. Furthermore, Milei’s history with failed crypto promotions (CoinX, Vulcano Game) reinforces a systematic pattern of promoting assets without control, which end up collapsing with million-dollar losses for investors.

Connections That Reinforce Suspicions

Mauricio Novelli, a trader close to Milei, met with him at the Casa Rosada months before the launch of LIBRA.

Julian Peh, CEO of Kip Protocol, the company that created LIBRA, also held meetings with Milei outside the government headquarters.

Hayden Mark Davis, founder of Kelsier Ventures and responsible for the launch of LIBRA, claimed to be an advisor to Milei and assured that the president initially supported the project.

Was LIBRA designed to manipulate the market?:

The project website was created on the same day of launch, without a solid background.

Bots artificially inflated the price after Milei’s tweet.

Eight wallets withdrew $107 million minutes before the crash, in a manually orchestrated “rug pull.”

Therefore: LIBRA was not a genuine crypto, but rather an alleged scheme designed to manipulate the market. And the most serious thing is that the architects of this scam have a history of collaboration with Milei.

The Argentine Fintech Chamber Tries to Separate Itself from the Scandal

On February 15, 2025, the Argentine Fintech Chamber issued a statement (see image) trying to distance the crypto industry from the LIBRA case.

Key points of the statement:

They claim that LIBRA is an isolated case and does not represent the Argentine crypto ecosystem.

They insist on the need for transparency and regulation in the sector.

They highlight that Argentina transacted more than $91.1 billion in crypto in 2024, reinforcing the idea that crypto technology is legitimate, but needs legal certainty.

What to highlight?: Its rapid distancing suggests that LIBRA is seen within the sector as an obvious fraud, increasing suspicions of financial manipulation.

Anti-Corruption Office (OA) investigation: An internal investigation was launched to determine whether there was misconduct or conflicts of interest within the government.

Creation of the Investigation Task Unit (UTI): Specialized team to collect information on the launch of LIBRA and submit it to justice.

Distance from Milei: He deleted his post and denied knowing the details of the project, attributing it to a “communication error.”

CNV Warning: The National Securities Commission called for strengthening the regulation of crypto assets to avoid similar frauds.

These actions seem more like an attempt at damage control than an actual effort to shed light on the fraud. Without structural changes in crypto regulation, cases like LIBRA will continue to occur with impunity.

Although Milei’s promotion of LIBRA has generated a strong political and economic impact, the legal measures in force in Argentina do not seem strong enough to sanction this type of behavior.

Deficiencies in Current Legislation:

Ethics in Public Service Law (Law 25,188): Does not contemplate direct criminal sanctions and only allows administrative disqualifications.

Penal Code – Illicit Enrichment (Art. 268): Difficult to apply if the profits cannot be linked directly to Milei.

Commercial Loyalty Law (Law 22,802): It has no precedent of application to a president.

Capital Market Law (Law 26,831): LIBRA was not registered as a negotiable security, which complicates its application.

Therefore: Without stricter regulation, these loopholes will continue to allow public figures to promote fraudulent projects without real consequences.

Urgent Reforms to Avoid New Scams

Reform to the Public Ethics Law: Explicitly prohibit the promotion of investments without prior regulation.

Specific regulation for cryptoassets: Mandatory registration with the CNV and transparency about final beneficiaries.

More severe sanctions for fraudulent advertising by officials: Amend the Commercial Loyalty Law to include clear penalties.

Classification of the crime of manipulation of the crypto market: Incorporate sanctions in the Penal Code for cases such as LIBRA.

A Government Involved or Simply Complicit?

The LIBRA scandal is not just another story of crypto fraud, but the reflection of an administration that, with the excuse of deregulation and “market freedom”, has opened the doors to shady financial schemes without any type of control.

If the government was truly unaware of LIBRA’s background, then it is guilty of alarming negligence. If, on the other hand, key figures within the ruling party participated in its promotion knowing what was happening, we are faced with an even more serious case: an attempt to manipulate the market from the highest levels of power.

LIBRA is not just a crypto scam, it is a symptom of an alleged power model that uses the digital economy to manipulate the market and profit from deregulation, without assuming any responsibility.