The bipartisan mask.
It calls itself the voice of the reasonable middle. It won’t tell you who pays for it. And when a name did leak, it was Clarence Thomas’s billionaire benefactor.
No Labels is a “bipartisan” centrist group organized as a 501(c)(4) — a structure that lets it keep its donors secret, and it does. What reporting has pried loose points one direction: Harlan Crow, the Republican megadonor, was a “whale”-tier funder who recruited two dozen more; Mother Jones obtained a list of 36 corporate high-rollers behind its 2024 effort; and its 2024 third-party “unity ticket” was widely assessed as a spoiler that would help return Donald Trump to power. This is the money-side companion to The Rented Center. We document what’s on the record and grade the mask for what it is.
What this page is about
No Labels was founded in 2010 by Nancy Jacobson — a longtime Democratic fundraiser — and chaired for years by former senator Joe Lieberman, who died in March 2024. It presents itself as a bipartisan home for the sensible center. Structurally, it is a 501(c)(4) “social welfare” nonprofit, which means it is not required to disclose its donors, and it refuses to, saying it will “never share the names” of its funders.
What has leaked or been reported complicates the “bipartisan” label. Harlan Crow — the Republican billionaire best known as Clarence Thomas’s benefactor — gave more than $130,000 and recruited some two dozen other donors. Mother Jones obtained a list of 36 wealthy contributors and corporate executives bankrolling the group’s 2024 ballot drive, even as No Labels publicly claimed it did not take corporate money. And in 2024 the group spent heavily toward a third-party “unity ticket” that Democrats and many analysts warned would function as a spoiler for Trump — before abandoning it in April 2024. This page grades that record.
Books that go deeper on this story. Links are Amazon affiliate searches — buying through them supports the work at no cost to you.
The record, in order
Every dated event on this page, assembled chronologically. The page may cover events in a different order for the narrative; this is the straight timeline.
- 2010No Labels is a 501(c)(4) ‘dark money’ group that refuses to disclose its donors.
- 2021Harlan Crow — Clarence Thomas’s benefactor — was a ‘whale’-tier No Labels donor who recruited two dozen more.
- Nov 2023Mother Jones obtained a list of 36 corporate donors — even as No Labels claimed it doesn’t take corporate money.
- 2024No Labels is a corporate/right-leaning operation wearing a bipartisan mask.
- Mar 27, 2024Founded and chaired by Democrats, but the disclosed money skews Republican and corporate.
- Apr 4, 2024In 2024, No Labels ran a dark-money-funded third-party ‘unity ticket’ widely assessed as a Trump spoiler — then abandoned it.
The mask and the money, claim by claim
The first five entries are documented and graded FACT, anchored to reporting from The New Republic, Sludge, Mother Jones, and the mainstream coverage of the 2024 effort. The sixth — the synthesis that No Labels is a corporate/right-leaning operation wearing a bipartisan mask — is graded PROBABLY TRUE.
No Labels is a 501(c)(4) ‘dark money’ group that refuses to disclose its donors.
FACTNo Labels is organized as a 501(c)(4) social-welfare nonprofit, a structure that — unlike parties, PACs, and candidates — is not required to reveal its funders. No Labels declines to disclose them, saying it will “never share the names” of its donors, citing fear of intimidation. Good-government groups including the League of Women Voters have publicly pressed it to open its books. The secrecy is the starting fact: a group asking the public to trust its neutrality will not say who pays for it.
Harlan Crow — Clarence Thomas’s benefactor — was a ‘whale’-tier No Labels donor who recruited two dozen more.
FACTBetween 2019 and 2021, Republican billionaire Harlan Crow — best known for lavishing undisclosed gifts on Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas — gave No Labels more than $130,000, reaching the group’s internal “whale” tier (above “dolphins” and “minnows”). Reporting found Crow had steered nearly two dozen additional donors to No Labels by 2021. For a group that markets itself as the antidote to partisan money, its own donor hierarchy was topped by one of the most prominent Republican megadonors in the country.
Mother Jones obtained a list of 36 corporate donors — even as No Labels claimed it doesn’t take corporate money.
FACTMother Jones obtained a list of 36 wealthy contributors and corporate high-rollers who wrote large checks toward No Labels’ 2024 ballot-access drive, including executives tied to Loews Corporation (Andrew Tisch), Fortress Investment Group (Drew McKnight), Fluor, Abry Partners, and SailPoint. Separately, Sludge reported that although No Labels publicly says it does not accept corporate money, company disclosures show corporate contributions — a direct contradiction between the group’s claim and the paper record.
Founded and chaired by Democrats, but the disclosed money skews Republican and corporate.
FACTNo Labels’ bipartisan branding is real at the leadership level: it was founded by Democratic fundraiser Nancy Jacobson and long chaired by former Democratic senator Joe Lieberman, who died on March 27, 2024. But the funding that has surfaced — Harlan Crow, Texas Republican donors, the Mother Jones corporate roster, donors who have given millions to Republican causes — skews right and corporate. The tension between a bipartisan front and a right-leaning donor base is the heart of the story, and it is documented, not inferred.
In 2024, No Labels ran a dark-money-funded third-party ‘unity ticket’ widely assessed as a Trump spoiler — then abandoned it.
FACTNo Labels spent heavily — toward a stated goal of roughly $70 million — to win 2024 ballot access for a third-party presidential “unity ticket.” Democrats and many independent analysts warned the effort would function as a spoiler, pulling votes from Joe Biden and helping return Donald Trump to the White House. After being rebuffed by prospects including Chris Christie and Nikki Haley (and distanced by Joe Manchin and Larry Hogan), No Labels announced on April 4, 2024 that it would “stand down” because no candidate with a credible path had emerged. No Labels rejected the spoiler characterization throughout.
No Labels is a corporate/right-leaning operation wearing a bipartisan mask.
PROBABLY TRUEThis is the synthesis, graded conservatively. The documented facts converge: a group that will not disclose its donors, whose surfaced funding runs to a top Republican megadonor and a roster of corporate executives, that publicly denied taking corporate money the record shows it took, and that spent millions on a project widely assessed as helping the Republican nominee. Against that sits genuine bipartisan leadership and the group’s own denials. We grade the “bipartisan mask” reading PROBABLY TRUE — strongly supported by the money and the 2024 effect — while noting we cannot see the full (undisclosed) donor base, and that a spoiler effect is not the same as proven partisan intent.
What’s documented, and what the secrecy hides
- The secrecy is the group’s own choice. No Labels is not obligated to disclose donors and refuses to. Everything we know about its funding is what reporters and disclosures pried loose around the edges — so the picture is partial by the group’s design, and we say so.
- What did surface is documented, not inferred. Harlan Crow’s $130,000-plus and donor recruiting, the Mother Jones list of 36, the corporate contributions No Labels denied taking — these are on the record in named reporting, not our supposition.
- Bipartisan leadership was real. Jacobson and Lieberman were Democrats, and the group courted both parties. We do not claim a hidden Republican command structure. The claim is narrower and about money: the disclosed funding leans right and corporate.
- Effect is not intent. That the 2024 ticket would likely have helped Trump is a widely-shared analysis and the reason Democrats fought it; No Labels denied a spoiler motive. We grade the effect as documented and leave the intent as contested.
“Centrism” you’re not allowed to audit
This is the same move as The Rented Center, one rung up: where Third Way at least files the tax forms that reveal an insurer front among its donors, No Labels declines to reveal its funders at all — and then asks to be trusted as the neutral middle. The “center” is presented as the absence of an agenda, but an agenda funded by undisclosed corporate and Republican money is still an agenda; it has simply purchased the right not to be named. That is why this sits in the Return on Investment ledger. The return the money sought in 2024 was a ballot line that could tip a presidential race — and the price of admission to judging it, the donors’ names, is exactly what the public was refused.
Questions worth taking seriously
Isn't a 501(c)(4) allowed to keep its donors private?
Yes — legally, it can. That’s the point, not a crime. The issue is the mismatch between the legal privilege and the public role: a group operating to influence a presidential election, and asking voters to trust it as neutral, is using a social-welfare nonprofit structure to hide who is paying for that influence. Legal secrecy is still secrecy.
If Democrats founded and led it, how is it right-leaning?
The leadership and the money point different directions, and that’s the story. Nancy Jacobson and Joe Lieberman are Democrats. But the funding that surfaced — Harlan Crow, Texas Republican donors, a corporate roster, donors who gave millions to GOP causes — leans right, and the 2024 project’s likely beneficiary was Trump. We don’t claim a secret GOP takeover; we document that the disclosed money and the real-world effect ran rightward.
Didn't No Labels stand down? Why does it still matter?
It abandoned the 2024 ticket, yes. It matters because the model persists: a dark-money “centrist” vehicle can spend years and tens of millions building the capacity to tip an election while refusing to say who funds it. The 2024 stand-down was about not finding a candidate, not about disclosure — the donor secrecy remains, and the template is reusable.
If you are named on this page
If you are named on this page, or are a party materially affected by the claims made here, and you wish to respond, correct the record, or add context, use the Contact page. Responses are published verbatim alongside the original claim, with the sender identified and the date of receipt. The channel stays open for the life of the page.
This site aggregates and grades a record that other outlets and primary sources have already put on the record. Every FACT-graded claim above is sourced to court filings, government reports, sworn whistleblower disclosures, published investigative journalism, or named-source statements. The citations are the accountability mechanism; this section is how you get on the record too.
The record
- The New Republic — No Labels Took More Than $100,000 From Clarence Thomas Buddy Harlan Crow
- Sludge — Harlan Crow and Texas Republican Donors Give to No Labels 2024 Super PAC
- Sludge — No Labels Says it Doesn’t Take Corporate Money, but Company Disclosures Show Otherwise
- Truthout — Corporate Donors Fund Dark Money Push for Third Party Presidential Challenger (Mother Jones list of 36)
- CBS News — No Labels abandons plans for ‘unity’ ticket in 2024 presidential race (Apr 4, 2024)
- NBC News — No Labels CEO defends 2024 ticket against spoiler charges (the group’s denial)
- NPR — Joe Lieberman, senator and vice presidential nominee, has died (No Labels founding chair)
- League of Women Voters — LWVUS urges No Labels to disclose its donors