Exposing Ray Langston's Hypocrisy

A Baseless Attack on Commissioner Scott Mijares

On Tuesday, September 16, 2025, at the Montrose County Board of County Commissioners meeting, Ray Langston alleged that Commissioner Scott Mijares violated the Hatch Act. Langston claimed he reported this supposed violation to the Federal Office of Special Counsel. This accusation is ironic given Langston's own history of questionable conduct. While I have been outspoken about Commissioner Mijares's personal shortcomings, including his need for better interpersonal skills and political acumen, Langston's claim is laughable. The Hatch Act is a federal law that primarily restricts political activities of federal employees and certain state or local employees whose principal duties involve federally funded programs. It does not broadly apply to local officials like county commissioners unless their roles directly tie to federal funding. Langston's misunderstanding of this law highlights his disregard for legal details, a pattern evident in his past actions.

The Hatch Act: Misapplied to Commissioner Mijares

The Hatch Act, enacted in 1939, aims to prevent partisan political influence in government by limiting activities such as campaigning while on duty or using official authority for political purposes. However, it applies mainly to federal executive branch employees and extends to state and local employees only if their principal employment involves administering federally funded programs, such as those under the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development or certain health initiatives. County commissioners like Mijares, whose duties focus on local governance such as budgeting and land use, are typically not covered unless specific federal ties exist. Langston's accusation ignores these nuances, potentially amounting to a reckless statement under Colorado law. Colorado Revised Statutes § 1-13-109 prohibits knowingly or recklessly making false statements designed to affect votes on candidates or issues, punishable as a misdemeanor. This supports the view that Langston's claims are not only baseless but could themselves violate state election laws.

Ray Langston's Record of Party Violations and Misconduct

The Montrose County Republican Party's executive committee has largely remained silent on Langston's repeated insults and false accusations, despite his history as a former party chair. His behavior includes public rants, such as at the April 2, 2025, county commissioners' meeting where he accused the party of corruption. The public, including law enforcement at district, state, and federal levels, deserves transparency about Langston's alleged corruption, bylaw violations, false accusations, attempted sabotage of candidates, misuse of funds, theft, and verbal assaults against women.

Violations of Party Bylaws and Neutrality Rules

In February 2021, Langston ran for re-election as party chair but received only 8 out of 48 votes, or 17 percent. Undeterred, he sought and obtained the role of Candidate Support Chair, only to violate bylaws by failing to remain neutral during the 2022 primary season. He was removed from this position in 2022, appealed to the state party, and lost. In 2023, he was nominated for chair again but received no second, leading to Scott Riba's election.

As chair in 2020, Langston refused to comply with a vacancy committee's decision to fill a central committee seat, violating explicit bylaws requiring acceptance of such appointments. He also attacked a CD-3 candidate at central committee meetings, breaching pre-primary neutrality rules.

Verbal Assaults and Abusive Behavior

Langston has a documented pattern of verbal abuse, particularly against women. His party secretary resigned due to his mistreatment. Women from Delta to Ridgway and Montrose to the West End have reported being yelled at or assaulted verbally by him. In one instance last year, he assaulted a woman and Army veteran at the county fair simply because she was the daughter of someone he disliked.

He ignores Ronald Reagan's advice against speaking ill of fellow Republicans, frequently attacking party members publicly. Langston supports former State Senator Don Coram, who betrayed the party by sponsoring legislation like HB 19-1032 (sex education bill leading to controversial surveys for children as young as 10) and SB 20-217 (removing qualified immunity for law enforcement). Coram also voted for HB 19-1263, decriminalizing certain drugs including fentanyl. Langston defends Coram while berating Mijares for not being a lifelong Republican.

In August 2021, Langston disrupted a guest speaker at a central committee meeting, yelling and using profanity as she presented evidence on Coram's HB 19-1032. The Montrose County Sheriff noted how SB 20-217 complicated law enforcement duties.

Langston had violent outbursts at least three times during 2024 candidate events, one at the March 2024 caucus, and another at the August 2024 party meeting. This led to his five-year ban from party functions. A witness to one outburst emailed: "The disrupters at last night's meeting made it very uncomfortable for many of us attendees. I thought here we go again. The yelling brought back old memories of the bullying and rudeness I experienced from this man. At times I pray for him, but so far I see no change in his behavior."

False Accusations and Defamation

Langston has accused former party leaders of corruption, calling them "con artists and liars." These claims deflect from his own record. On April 2, 2025, he falsely accused a Republican county commissioner of voting Democrat in 2020, potentially violating voter privacy laws since voting records are private unless disclosed by the individual. Such reckless statements could fall under Colorado Revised Statutes § 1-13-109, which addresses false or reckless claims about candidates. In political contexts, defamation requires proving actual malice for public figures, as established in New York Times v. Sullivan (1964), where the U.S. Supreme Court held that false statements about public officials must be made with knowledge of falsity or reckless disregard for truth. Colorado follows this in cases like Counterman v. Colorado (2023), affirming recklessness standards in speech-related offenses.

In a late February 2024 meet-and-greet, Langston had a violent outburst, then falsely accused the sponsor in the press. There were about 35 witnesses, including two senior law enforcement members. He also wrongly accused the sponsor and his wife of bylaw violations for not inviting all candidates, despite the event being privately funded.

In spring 2022, he posted on Facebook telling a Republican to "go to hell" for criticizing Coram's HB 19-1263 vote. In August 2020, he falsely posted that two Freedom Caucus members would not attend a CD-3 candidate event, despite confirmations otherwise.

Last year, in a letter to the editor, he falsely took credit for 2020 voter turnout while allegedly sabotaging the CD-3 candidate's campaign.

Misuse of Funds and Alleged Theft

In June 2020, Langston removed Lauren Boebert's campaign literature from party headquarters without authorization, refusing to return it until County Commissioner Keith Caddy intervened. Boebert drove two hours to retrieve it, and a police report was filed. This act constitutes interference with election material under Colorado Revised Statutes § 1-13-113, punishable as a class 2 misdemeanor with up to 120 days in jail or a $750 fine.

Campaign cash donations were left unaccounted for in a desk drawer, with witnesses seeing Langston take funds without receipts. The treasurer could not verify totals.

He used party funds for an unauthorized dinner and donated to a preferred candidate in November 2020, violating the party's decision to send money to the Trump Defense Fund.

In fall 2020, a West End community leader accused him of stealing funds from a local event meant solely for that area.

Langston has refused to submit his final December 2020 financial report, now over four years overdue, exemplifying potential corruption.

Legal Violations Requiring Attention

Langston's actions warrant investigation for several violations:

1. First Amendment Violations: His outbursts disrupted peaceful assemblies at caucuses, forums, and meet-and-greets, infringing on rights to assemble and speak freely under the U.S. Constitution's First Amendment. The U.S. Supreme Court in Tinker v. Des Moines (1969) protected symbolic speech unless it causes substantial disruption. In public meetings, removal requires actual disruption, as noted in cases like Norse v. City of Santa Cruz (9th Cir. 2010), emphasizing content-neutral enforcement. Law enforcement was called to some events to maintain peace.

2. Election Law Violations: Removing Boebert's materials violated Colorado Revised Statutes § 1-13-113 on interference with election material. False statements about voting records and candidates breach § 1-13-109. His intimidation tactics, including outbursts and threats of lawsuits, fall under § 1-13-713, a class 1 misdemeanor for interfering with elective franchise. Recent cases like Tina Peters's conviction for election tampering illustrate Colorado's strict enforcement of such laws.

3. Misuse or Theft of Funds: Unaccounted cash and unauthorized expenditures suggest theft, potentially prosecutable under general theft statutes.

A Call for Accountability

In an April 7, 2025, response in the Montrose Mirror, we detailed Langston's misdeeds, but he persisted with libel and slander. Voters, especially Republicans and independents, must know the truth to avoid influence from his falsehoods. Do not be intimidated by his lawsuit threats; his record is documented.