There is a new discussion of the “Libra y Milei” case in the Deputies Investigative Commission

The Investigative Commission of the LIBRA case created in the Chamber of Deputies of Argentina met for the second time to advance a session that lasted more than 9 hours about the controversial digital currency released by President Javier Milei.

However, invited key people did not appear at the meeting and legislators failed to agree on the designation of authorities, which evidenced again the lack of political consensus around the issue.

Mauricio Novelli and Manuel Terrones Godoy were summoned, indicated as central figures in the promotion of the project, but both were missing. Nor did President Javier Milei or his sister attendthe Secretary General of the Presidency, Karina Milei, who had also been summoned by the Commission.

Despite the institutional stagnation, the day had technical exhibitions and key testimonies promoted by the opposition to the government.

The journalist Irina Hauser, from the newspaper Page 12, was one of the main exhibitors of the day. Before the commission, he shared advances in the ongoing judicial investigation, in charge of Judge María Servini and prosecutor Eduardo Taiano. Among the most striking elements, he mentioned a report of the Money Laundering Directorate of the Federal Police, which details A series of bank movements made by Mauricio Novelli.

According to that document, a few days before the scandal broke out by the Token Libra, Novelli visited a Banco Galicia branch in the company of his mother and sister to authorize the use of two security boxes. Then, three days after the collapse of the cryptoactive, they returned to the bank with backpacks and empty bags, and, according to the report, they retired “with them full.”

Hauser also referred to Hayden Davis, denounced both in Argentina and in the United States, who claimed to have 100 million dollars from Argentines and have been in contact with people from the presidential environment, waiting for instructions on what to do with those funds.

The journalist stressed that Davis, along with others involved in the case, They made multiple visits to both the Casa Rosada and the Fifth of Olivos. He pointed out that Karina Milei was the one who authorized that income and stressed the high frequency of the meetings: “They were eight at Casa Rosada and three in the fifth of Olivos,” he said.

Once the deputies began to exchange allegations, Christian Castillo, of the left front party, said that without the post of Milei “the fraudulent maneuver could not have been completed behind Libra.” In addition, he made reference to the scandal being investigated in both Argentina and the United States.

For his part, Deputy Nicolás Massot, of the Federal Meeting, said that the scandal “did a skinny favor to the development of the ecosystem”, and, although he called the caution when evaluating responsibilities, he considered that the president’s message lacked the necessary precision.

«If Milei’s tweet had not included the suggestion that the project had economic applicability and, therefore, potential profitability, we would not be discussing any of this. If instead we had said ‘we launched Libra, a project in support of my political figure’, no one could have talked about a scam, ”Massot argued.

One of the most technical interventions corresponded to deputy Julia Estrada (Union for the Homeland), who He asked precise questions to the Argentine developer of the Santiago Siri cryptocurrency industryon the tracking of digital wallets and the link between the funds raised and the figure of the president.

«You could analyze the multifirma wallets, which are the ones that we understand that today they have the money for the earnings product of Libra. Because Libra had winners and losers. When you analyze the data (…), you find that Milei’s tweet appears … What does this mean and what are the interpretations? Then, you say that two of these wallets were anchored by Kraken and one by Bybit. What does this fund imply? In addition, you propose that they were created just a few hours before the launch of Libra, which would indicate that it was all armed. Finally, I ask you to help us specify if it is possible to request information from Bybit and Kraken »

Julia Estrada, deputy of Union for the Homeland.

Given the consultations, Siri explained that Milei’s tweet was included in the cryptoactive debut project in the Solana network. “The Token Libra was born with that message,” he said, added that The three multifirma wallets were activated just hours after the launchreceiving the funds in minutes. In addition, he pointed out that it is possible to request information from the platforms involved to clarify the origin of these funds.

«Milei’s message is in the metadata that appears in the creation of Token. When pound is created, this data and that tweet are generated. These data are accessible through Solscan, the tool to navigate the Solana network. This means, at least a priori, that who created the Token did so thinking about Argentina, in financing projects and in support of Milei. I am not in a position to give more details … Now, the three multifirma wallets were created a couple of hours after the launch, not instantly, and they were barely activated the funds: one received 44 million dollars in USDC, which are seized – that money you cannot move through how USDC works – and the other two received 21 and 9 million dollars in Solana, respectively. All were created between 2 and 3 hours after the launch of Libra, and in just 2 or 3 minutes they received the funds »

Santiago Siri, cryptoactive specialist.

Deputy Estrada also exhibited photographs of the mother and sister of Mauricio Novelli at a bank branch, with the aim of strengthening suspicions about washing maneuvers or irregular retreats of funds after the collapse of the Token.

While opposition blocks insist on clarifying the role of the president and its surroundings in the operation, the absence of the main ones involved and the lack of effective driving in the commission keep the case wrapped in a combination of suspicions, institutional emptiness and a latent judicial interest.