Libra and Melania Controversy: Memecoin Manipulation Unveiled

Unraveling the Controversy Behind Libra and Melania Memecoins

The world of memecoins has always been rife with speculation, intrigue, and skepticism. However, recent revelations indicate a pattern of market manipulation involving the Libra (LIBRA) and Melania (MELANIA) tokens—two digital assets that have been at the center of controversy. Blockchain analytics firm Bubblemaps has put forth compelling evidence suggesting that the same individuals responsible for launching Melania’s token were also behind the creation of Libra. The implications of this discovery extend far beyond financial losses; they have even led to political fallout, with Argentine President Javier Milei facing impeachment calls due to the disastrous impact of the Libra token launch.

Blockchain Traces Linking LIBRA and MELANIA

On February 17, Bubblemaps analysts detailed their findings on X, revealing a striking connection between the two projects. By sifting through on-chain data, they identified suspicious patterns that linked both tokens’ launches to a specific Solana wallet, known as “0xcEA.” This wallet played a pivotal role in both events, having profited significantly from the launch of Melania’s memecoin on January 19 before channeling its entire earnings through an Avalanche-based wallet—an act that strongly suggested deliberate obfuscation.

What made this discovery even more telling was how these transactions were processed. Numerous cross-chain transfers and intermediary Solana wallets were employed along the way, complicating the tracking process but ultimately failing to hide the intricate web of connections. “This means the creator of Melania—or someone closely tied to their team—sniped their own launch,” Bubblemaps stated in their analysis. The presence of identical patterns in the subsequent Libra launch only reinforced suspicions of an orchestrated scheme.

A Repeated Playbook: Profiting from Token Sniping

A matter of weeks after the Melania debacle, Bubblemaps identified an eerily similar maneuver with the Libra token. The infamous 0xcEA wallet was found to have directly funded another address—one responsible for launching Libra. Once again, history repeated itself. Upon the token’s release on February 15, the wallet engaged in aggressive sniping activities, walking away with a massive $6 million in profits.

The method used remained unchanged: multiple side addresses, each funded via cross-chain transfer protocols from sources on Arbitrum and Avalanche, were employed to ensure anonymity while extracting immense gains. This unmistakable pattern confirmed what many had suspected—the same actors were likely orchestrating both launches for personal profit at the expense of retail investors.

To make matters worse, investigations revealed that this was not an isolated occurrence. The analysts disclosed that the 0xcEA wallet had been associated with numerous other “pump-and-dump” schemes. Among them was a fraudulent Robinhood (HOOD) token, which momentarily soared to a peak market capitalization of $120 million before crashing to $12.5 million—a textbook example of how unsuspecting investors are routinely exploited in such schemes.

The Sudden Collapse of LIBRA and MELANIA

Despite its grand unveiling, the LIBRA token suffered an astonishing collapse within hours, leaving devastation in its wake. Initially endorsed by President Milei, the token’s launch quickly deteriorated into a financial catastrophe when insiders executed a massive sell-off. Reports suggest that individuals connected to the project liquidated holdings worth $107 million within a mere four-hour window, effectively wiping out approximately 94% of its value.

Blockchain intelligence firm Lookonchain traced at least eight wallets linked to the Libra team that collectively drained significant liquidity from the token. Their calculations indicate that these exits funneled away $57.6 million in USD Coin and 249,671 Solana, which were valued at $49.7 million at the time.

The Melania token followed a similarly disastrous trajectory. Launched on January 19, it initially surged to a staggering valuation exceeding $13 billion within its first few hours of trading. However, this meteoric rise proved to be unsustainable; the token ultimately crumbled by 99%, settling at a market capitalization of just $189 million by the time of the report’s release.

Conclusion: A Pattern of Market Manipulation

The evidence presented by Bubblemaps paints a damning picture of insider market manipulation. The recurrence of the same wallet address, the identical profit-extraction strategies, and the dramatic crashes of both tokens indicate that these launches were far from spontaneous; rather, they appear to be carefully premeditated schemes designed to capitalize on hype before exiting at the expense of everyday traders.

As memecoins continue to captivate public attention, cases like these serve as a cautionary tale. Investors must remain vigilant, particularly in an environment where hype-driven projects can quickly turn into financial disasters. What remains to be seen, however, is whether regulatory authorities will step in to curb such exploitative practices—or if the cycle of deception will continue unchecked.