Two members of the Durst real estate family are suing the centrist political group No Labels, saying its pursuit of a possible third-party presidential bid is a breach of contract.
“This case seeks to hold No Labels accountable for the consequences of its misguided actions that have left its original benefactors like the Dursts feeling bewildered, betrayed and outraged,” the suit says.
Randy Mastro, a lawyer at King & Spalding who is representing the Dursts, said they had “agreed to fund No Labels because it committed to promote bipartisanship and bridge the political divide.”
He continued: “They never imagined at the time that No Labels would pivot to becoming the organization behind a quixotic third-party candidacy that could skew the most consequential presidential election of our lifetime.
The one thing that has changed, unfortunately, is that a group of partisan operatives has launched a conspiracy to subvert No Labels’ ballot access work, and the Dursts’ frivolous lawsuit now appears to be part of it.”
The suit relies on personal interactions that the Dursts, who are not registered Democrats, had with the group, such as with fund-raising solicitors, and on public reporting about No Labels’s activities.
The complaint repeatedly suggests that the point of No Labels’s efforts to have another presidential candidate option in 2024 if there is a Biden-Trump matchup is to tilt the field toward the political right.
The original article contains 920 words, the summary contains 199 words. Saved 78%. I’m a bot and I’m open source!
The summary’s fourth paragraph looks like a continuation of the quote started in the third paragraph. It is actually part of a quote from another individual and is part of a rebuttal to the content of the third paragraph.
This is the best summary I could come up with:
“This case seeks to hold No Labels accountable for the consequences of its misguided actions that have left its original benefactors like the Dursts feeling bewildered, betrayed and outraged,” the suit says.
Randy Mastro, a lawyer at King & Spalding who is representing the Dursts, said they had “agreed to fund No Labels because it committed to promote bipartisanship and bridge the political divide.”
He continued: “They never imagined at the time that No Labels would pivot to becoming the organization behind a quixotic third-party candidacy that could skew the most consequential presidential election of our lifetime.
The one thing that has changed, unfortunately, is that a group of partisan operatives has launched a conspiracy to subvert No Labels’ ballot access work, and the Dursts’ frivolous lawsuit now appears to be part of it.”
The suit relies on personal interactions that the Dursts, who are not registered Democrats, had with the group, such as with fund-raising solicitors, and on public reporting about No Labels’s activities.
The complaint repeatedly suggests that the point of No Labels’s efforts to have another presidential candidate option in 2024 if there is a Biden-Trump matchup is to tilt the field toward the political right.
The original article contains 920 words, the summary contains 199 words. Saved 78%. I’m a bot and I’m open source!
Bad bot. Needs tweaking.
The summary’s fourth paragraph looks like a continuation of the quote started in the third paragraph. It is actually part of a quote from another individual and is part of a rebuttal to the content of the third paragraph.
That’s why I try to use gift links; it’s important to actually be able to read the article.
deleted by creator