Libra II - Electric Boogaloo

Nine months dormant. $57.6 million sitting in wallets tied to one of 2025's most brazen political crypto scams.

Then November hits, and those same addresses - quiet since February's Argentina rug pull - suddenly snaps awake and rotates $61.5 million into Solana at $135 per token.

Not a cautious test. Not a slow unwinding. A calculated 456,401 SOL buy executed with the kind of confidence that only comes from watching a federal judge unfreeze your assets three months earlier while calling you cooperative and definitely-not-evasive.

Prosecutors in two countries scramble to trace wallet flows. Circle, the USDC issuer with freeze buttons gathering dust, stays silent.

Hayden Davis - fresh off a $12 million YZY snipe, just a day after his funds were unfrozen by a Manhattan federal judge. - continues trading like a man who's learned the most important lesson crypto has to teach: legal proceedings move at the speed of paperwork, capital moves at the speed of blockchains, and betting on the latter has paid out every single time.

When the referee unfreezes the scoreboard before the game ends, who's really playing by the rules?

August 19, 2025: Judge Jennifer Rochon of the Southern District of New York lifts the freeze on $57.6 million in USDC tied to the LIBRA collapse.

Her reasoning reads like it was workshopped by the defense team: defendants cooperated with proceedings, they're not "evasive actors," money damages remain "available to compensate the putative class."

Translation: They showed up to court, didn't flee to Panama, and the money's still technically there, so what's the problem?

Plaintiffs are seeking over $100 million in damages in the ongoing lawsuit.

To keep the freeze in place, they had to prove irreparable harm.

Judge Rochon wasn't buying it. She expressed "skepticism" about their likelihood of success and cut them loose.

Davis' attorney Mazin Sbaiti immediately declared victory: "This ruling affirms what we have said all along - this case is meritless." Ben Chow's lawyer called the claims “untested and meritless,” and that “we look forward to briefing our upcoming motion asking the court to dismiss this lawsuit.”

Both defendants walked away with eight figures in liquid stablecoins and a judicial blessing that they'd been good boys who played by the rules.

August 20, 2025: Exactly one day later, Kanye West's YZY memecoin launches.

Fourteen wallets - traced by Bubblemaps - sniped the token within one minute of announcement. They'd been pre-funded from centralized exchanges the day before.

At least one wallet burned 129 SOL (~$24K) in priority fees to shove itself to the front of the YZY launch queue.

Total investment from the Davis cluster: $2.8 million.

Total extraction: $12 million.

Meanwhile, 51,000 wallets lost $74.8 million as YZY crashed 80% from its $3 billion peak.

Coincidence? Strategic timing? Or a masterclass in reading the room?

The court said "not evasive."

On-chain data said "immediately active."

One day between legal clearance and the next score.

Not weeks. Not months. One day.

If judicial approval is just a countdown timer to the next extraction, what exactly is the legal system protecting?

Buying the Dip

Two wallets. Tagged by Nansen as "Defcy" (Libra Deployer) and "61yKS" (Libra: Wallet), were silent since February's presidential rug pull.

Those 2 Wallets are as follows…

Labeled Libra Deployer on Arkham:
DefcyKc4yAjRsCLZjdxWuSUzVohXtLna9g22y3pBCm2z

Labeled Libra Squads Vault on Arkham: 61yKS9bjxWdqNgAHt439DfoNfwK3uKPAJGWAsFkC5M4C

Nine months of nothing. No withdrawals. No swaps. No movement.

Then November 18 rolls around, and suddenly both addresses wake up like they'd set calendar reminders.

First move: the LIBRA team withdrew $3.94 million USDC from its liquidity pools - the residual funds left after earlier cash-outs.

Second move: they rotated nearly $61.6 million USDC into 456,401 SOL, at an average price of $135 per token.

Funds consolidated to a fresh address: FKp1tEiy55hiAZs3RaYr8mj87U5ZcopB5aXgCPD8dNX7

On-chain data (via Lookonchain / Nansen, reported by Tekedia) indicates that after the swap the funds consolidated into one or more Solana addresses.

According to Tekedia, one wallet holds 328,619 SOL, with other portions held in closely related wallets.

Why SOL instead of keeping USDC?

Circle - the company that issues USDC - can freeze addresses.

They've done it before. Tornado Cash sanctions, OFAC compliance, law enforcement requests. One API call and your stablecoins turn into locked database entries.

According to Solana’s documentation, the FreezeAccount instruction only works for SPL tokens whose mints are configured with a freeze_authority - and native SOL (outside of any SPL mint) does not use that freeze mechanism.

Meanwhile, Solana’s cross‑chain bridge ecosystem is robust, with deep liquidity and multiple well‑known bridges, making SOL a liquid, highly accessible asset to convert into.

Putting roughly $61.6 million USDC into SOL wasn’t just portfolio rebalancing - it was risk mitigation. In a world where Circle can freeze USDC, moving into a native asset like SOL is a logical flight strategy.

Bybit counted 16 blockchains that can freeze funds without asking.

While USDC is issued on many of these chains, the specific LIBRA‑linked addresses in question were previously frozen and then unfrozen - but they now appear to be unrestricted again, despite the broader legal and on-chain scrutiny.

Argentine authorities froze some of Libra’s assets recently.

Amount frozen: $507,000 - merely a drop in the bucket.

Meanwhile, 456,401 SOL sits freely.

While some of these funds were temporarily frozen earlier this year, they are currently unrestricted and fully traceable on-chain.

When stolen funds buy the dip while investigators buy time, who's really ahead?

Checking Receipts

Nine months later, here's where everyone stands.

Hayden Davis: Still free. Still trading. LIBRA netted an estimated $100 million.

MELANIA added millions more. WOLF collapsed 99% but not before extraction. YZY delivered $12 million profit the day after his assets unfroze.

Now: Active on-chain, managing a nine-figure crypto portfolio, zero arrests.

Why is this kid so untouchable?

Ben Chow: Resigned from Meteora in February. A class action lawsuit filed in the Southern District of New York accuses Meteora co-founder Benjamin Chow of orchestrating a systematic fraud scheme.

A co‑founder at Jupiter reportedly said Chow showed a ‘lack of judgment’ in his role.

Separately, Chow was previously convicted of insider trading in the Southern District of New York back in 2018.

Current status: Named defendant, a convicted felon facing civil scrutiny - no new criminal charges filed.

President Javier Milei: Saw his approval rating drop to 45% after the LIBRA scandal, according to a national survey..

The episode, dubbed “Cryptogate” by some media, hasn’t derailed his political power: his party still won the midterms, and the controversy hasn’t ended his presidency.

Political cost: Moderate.

Legal trouble: Zero, so far…

Mauricio Novelli and Manuel Terrones Godoy: They are being treated by Argentine prosecutors as key “crypto-to-fiat converters” in the LIBRA scandal.

A judge has frozen some of their assets - and reportedly barred them from transferring goods or vehicles.

Investigators even requested their detention, citing flight risk.

Not helping matters, security footage allegedly shows Novelli’s mother and sister leaving a Banco Galicia branch on February 17 with bulging bags after accessing his safety deposit boxes.

What was inside? Unknown.

Where it went? Also unknown.

Where are they now? Take a guess. Spoiler: Not behind bars.

The Victims: Nansen estimates $251 million in losses across LIBRA alone.

Argentine prosecutors estimate $100-120 million.

Add MELANIA's crash, WOLF's collapse, and YZY's $74.8 million in retail losses.

Compensation Received: $0.

The Legal System Tally is as follows…

US: Class-action ongoing since May. Trial date: Not set. Outcome: Uncertain. Defendants' Funds: Unfrozen and mobile.

Argentina: Criminal investigation active. Arrests: Zero. Asset freeze: $507,000 (chump change compared to the extracted capital).

Interpol: Red Notice requested for Hayden Davis back in March.
Status 9 months Later: Still not issued
Davis location: Public, active, trading.

Four tokens. Four extractions. A couple of ongoing investigations.

Zero arrests. A small amount of frozen funds. Zero deterrent.

Pattern recognition isn't complex: celebrity prop → pump → extract → reallocate → repeat.

Each iteration proves the previous one's immunity.

LIBRA taught them the presidential endorsement playbook works.

MELANIA confirmed First Lady branding moves markets.

WOLF showed they could launch while investigations proceeded.

YZY demonstrated post-unfreeze impunity.

Now November's SOL accumulation writes the next chapter: convert extracted capital to liquid assets, buy corrections, hold crypto that can move faster than courts can freeze.

Every legal filing becomes a countdown timer to the next scheme. Every unfreeze confirms the system can't catch what moves at blockchain speed.

The tally explains the confidence. The mechanics explain why.

When each successful extraction funds the infrastructure for the next one, are we witnessing serial fraud or a sustainable business model?

Outrunning Justice

Two countries. Multiple agencies. One Interpol request. Hundreds of millions in documented theft.

Results: Nothing moves except the money.

U.S. jurisdiction calls it civil. Money damages available, they said. Judge unfroze $57.6 million because defendants weren't "evasive."

Shortly after the funds were unfrozen, those same defendants bought $61.5 million in SOL during a market correction.

Civil doesn't mean toothless - it means slow. Discovery, depositions, motions, appeals. Years of process designed for disputes between parties who aren't actively converting assets across blockchains while litigating.

Argentina calls it criminal. Prosecutors estimate $100-120 million in losses. They've frozen $507,000 - enough to matter on paper, irrelevant on-chain.

Criminal means arrest warrants, extradition treaties, Interpol coordination.

All useful tools when suspects sit still.

Less useful when they're active on public blockchains, trading through decentralized exchanges, and living in jurisdictions that process Red Notices at diplomatic speed.

Circle - USDC's issuer - has frozen addresses before. Tornado Cash. OFAC sanctions. Law enforcement requests were processed within days. They have the infrastructure, the precedent, and the legal authority.

These specific addresses? Still moving. Still trading.

No statement about why wallets tied to one of 2025's largest political crypto scandals remain fully functional despite:

Active investigations. Prosecutor reports. Blockchain evidence viewed by millions.

Just silence and executable smart contracts.

Memecoins fall outside SEC jurisdiction. Not securities, just tokens.

In early 2025 the SEC’s Division of Corporation Finance issued a staff statement concluding that typical meme coins do not qualify as securities under federal law. As a result, coin purchasers are left without the protections of federal securities laws - though fraud statutes remain available for enforcement.

With federal securities protections off the table, regulators are left chasing fast‑moving tokens across borders, often hitting walls where national authority ends and blockchain immutability begins.

Cross-border crimes hit jurisdictional walls.

U.S. courts can't enforce it in Argentina. Argentine prosecutors can't arrest in America.

Interpol requests get filed, reviewed, and processed through channels designed for traditional crime, not blockchain operations that complete in minutes.

Legal proceedings measure time in months. Blockchain transactions measure time in blocks.

Discovery takes quarters. Asset rotation takes seconds.

Depositions need scheduling. Liquidity pools provide instant execution.

From LIBRA to MELANIA to WOLF to YZY. Each scheme was funded by the last. Each investigation starting from zero while targets operate with nine-figure runways.

Four extractions. Four times the pattern held: launch, extract, investigate, repeat.

Markets learn from pattern recognition. So do criminals.

Every successful round teaches the same lesson - enforcement can't match execution speed, jurisdictional gaps are features not bugs, and legal risk exists mostly on paper.

The playbook isn't sophisticated because it's technically complex. It's sophisticated because it's structurally immune.

Millions extracted. Zero arrests executed. Barely any funds recovered.

Prosecutors file papers. Defense attorneys declare victories. Judges unfreeze assets. Wallets convert stablecoins to crypto that they can move faster than courts can freeze, if they do it again of course.

And everyone watching learns the same thing Davis already knew: legal proceedings move at the speed of institutions built for a world where money couldn't teleport across borders in six seconds.

When extraction happens faster than enforcement can respond, who's really breaking whose rules?

Nine months wasn't a cooling-off period. It was a waiting room.

February taught them the playbook works.

August taught them the legal system helps more than it hurts.

November taught everyone else that sequels aren't just possible - they're profitable.

LIBRA extracted over $107 million, triggered international investigations, made headlines globally, and resulted in exactly zero consequences that mattered.

So they came back. Not quietly. Not cautiously.

But with $61.5 million in SOL purchases during a market correction while prosecutors were still filing motions about the first rug.

Each investigation becomes free market research on which jurisdictional gaps are widest, which enforcement mechanisms are slowest, which assets are hardest to freeze.

Every unfreeze is a green light. Every delayed arrest is confirmation.

Every "ongoing investigation" is just another entry on a resume that apparently impresses no one who matters.

If getting away with it once makes you bold, what does getting away with it four times while actively investigated make you - untouchable or just well-informed?

REKT sert de plateforme publique pour des auteurs anonymes, nous déclinons toute responsabilité quant aux opinions ou contenus hébergés sur REKT.

faites un don (ETH / ERC20): 0x3C5c2F4bCeC51a36494682f91Dbc6cA7c63B514C

avertissement:

REKT n'est responsable en aucune manière du contenu publié sur notre site Web ou en lien avec nos Services, qu'il soit publié ou occasionné par l'Auteur Anon de notre site Web, ou par REKT. Bien que nous fournissions des règles pour la conduite et les publications de l'Auteur Anon, nous ne contrôlons pas et ne sommes pas responsables de ce que l'Auteur Anon publie, transmet ou partage sur notre site Web ou nos Services, et ne sommes pas responsables de tout contenu offensant, inapproprié, obscène, illégal ou autrement répréhensible que vous pourriez rencontrer sur notre site Web ou nos Services. REKT ne saurait être tenu responsable de la conduite, en ligne ou hors ligne, de tout utilisateur de notre site Web ou de nos services.