No products in the cart.


The Clinton Chronicles

Photo courtesy TownHall dot com
Photo courtesy TownHall dot com

This video was published in the early 1990s. It has been circulating ever since, yet the Clintons remain undaunted as the world ignores their criminality.  Two Bushes, one Clinton, and one Obama have just about put the final nail in America’s coffin, and now Hillary Clinton is actually being allowed by one of the two major political parties to run for the White House, proving overtly and on the public record that crime pays….

[ot-video type=”youtube” url=”″]


Elias Alias, editor



Elias Alias

Editor in Chief for Oath Keepers; Unemployed poet; Lover of Nature and Nature's beauty. Slave to all cats. Reading interests include study of hidden history, classical literature. Concerned Constitutional American. Honorably discharged USMC Viet Nam Veteran. Founder, TheMentalMilitia.Net



  1. What about being found guilty of election fraud by a jury also as being inserted as a “presidential candidate”? And she is still being allowed to run?

    South Bend, Indiana JURY found that Election fraud put BOTH Obama and Hillary Clinton on the presidential primary ballot in Indiana in the 2008 election.

    Neither can be a US President, too many crimes that we MUST charge, arrest, and prosecute, and do not forget Bill.

  2. The list of dead around the Clinton’s is extra long. I bought the Clinton Chronicles when it was published. Don’t forget Waco and Ruby Ridge and the scary Janet Reno actions.

    This is long, but worth the read.

    The Botched Ron Brown Investigation

    An Interview with AFIP Forensic Photographer Kathleen Janoski

    by Wesley Phelan

    Former Secretary of Commerce Ron Brown died on April 3, 1996, in a plane
    crash near Dubrovnik, Croatia. Thirty- four persons accompanying Brown on
    the trade mission also died in the crash. Due to the efforts of Judicial Watch
    we now know beyond a reasonable doubt that seats on Brown’s Commerce
    Department trade missions were sold to raise funds for the Democratic
    National Committee and the 1996 Clinton/Gore Campaign. There is
    overwhelming evidence that Bill and Hillary Clinton knew of and approved
    this improper and illegal fundraising scheme [1].

    Even more serious than the sale of public property for campaign contributions
    is the likelihood that transfers of American technology, approved and
    overseen by Ron Brown’s Commerce Department, breached national security.
    Bernard Schwartz, head of Loral Corporation and a major donor to the DNC,
    accompanied Brown on a 1994 trade mission to China. During this trade
    mission Brown set up a meeting between Schwartz and a Chinese government
    official. This meeting led to a transfer of American missile technology to the
    Chinese that is now the subject of a congressional investigation [2].

    At the time of his death Ron Brown was under subpoena to produce
    documents relating to the sale of seats on trade missions to Judicial Watch for
    its suit against the Commerce Department. Nolanda Hill, a friend and business
    partner of Brown, testified under oath that Brown had shown her a collection
    of such documents in an ostrich skin portfolio. These documents were
    withheld from Judicial Watch in violation of the subpoena and a FOIA
    request. Just before his death Brown reportedly said of his mounting legal
    troubles, “I am too old to go to jail. If I go down, I’ll take everyone else down
    with me” [3].

    The suspicious circumstances surrounding the crash of Brown’s plane have
    given rise to much speculation of foul play [4]. Making Brown’s death even
    more suspicious is the fact that a perfectly round .45 inch inwardly beveling
    hole was discovered in the top of his head as his body was being processed
    by the Armed Forces Institute of Pathology (AFIP). The story of the hole in
    Brown’s head broke on November 24, with a report by Christopher Ruddy in
    the Pittsburgh Tribune- Review. Ruddy reported that Lt. Col. Steve
    Cogswell, a deputy medical examiner with AFIP, questioned the official
    finding that Brown died of multiple blunt- force trauma as a result of the
    airplane crash. Cogswell, who did not personally examine Brown’s body,
    based his suspicions on x-rays and photographs of the top of Brown’s head.
    Also suspicious, according to Cogswell, was the fact that the original x-rays
    of Brown’s head showed possible metal fragments in the brain, consistent
    with a high-velocity gunshot wound. The two head x-rays are missing from
    Brown’s file and Cogswell suspects they were never placed in the file [5].

    On December 5, 1997, AFIP imposed a gag order on Cogswell, forcing him
    to refer all press inquiries on the Brown case to AFIP’s public affairs office.
    Cogswell was told he could leave his office only with the permission of Dr.
    Jerry Spencer, Armed Forces Medical Examiner. He was escorted to his
    house by military police, who seized all of his case materials on the Brown
    crash. If matters had remained there we could dismiss Cogswell as a rather
    eccentric fellow willing to jeopardize his military career by making wild
    accusations. But on December 9, 1997, Lt. Col. David Hause, another AFIP
    pathologist, came forward to corroborate Cogswell’s story.

    Hause, one of AFIP’s leading experts on gunshot wounds, was present in the
    room when Brown’s body was being examined. A commotion erupted when
    Chief Petty Officer Kathleen Janoski said “Wow, look at the hole in Ron
    Brown’s head.” Hause walked over and verified that the wound penetrated the
    skull, exposing brain matter. According to Hause, the wound “looked like a
    punched- out .45-caliber entrance hole.” After Hause spoke to Ruddy, the
    AFIP gag order was broadened to include all AFIP personnel.

    On January 8, the Justice Department announced it had found no reason to
    launch an investigation into the case. The next day a story by Michael Fletcher
    appeared in the Washington Post. Fletcher reported that AFIP had convened
    a review panel of all its pathologists, including Cogswell and Hause. Fletcher
    said the panel came to the unanimous conclusion that Brown died of
    blunt-force trauma and that the hole in the top of Brown’s head was not a
    gunshot wound.

    Unfortunately for Fletcher, his story misrepresented what happened in the
    review panel. What actually happened, according to Cogswell, is that he
    refused to participate in the review because he thought it would not be fair
    and unbiased. His lawyer concurred with his decision. In fact, most of those
    participating in the review were not board-certified in forensic pathology. Of
    those who were certified, none had significant interest or experience in
    gunshot wounds. All of the Armed Forces Medical Examiner’s forensic
    pathologists with any expertise in gunshot wounds (Cogswell, Hause, and
    Parsons) dissented from the “official” opinion [6].

    On January 13, yet another member of AFIP joined the ranks of the dissenters.
    Kathleen Janoski, a 22-year Navy veteran, was the head of AFIP’s forensic
    photography unit. Janoski says she was told that missing evidence from the
    Brown file was purposely destroyed. Janoski originally declined to speak to
    the press about the matter, but finally came forward out of concern for the
    careers of Cogswell, Hause, and Parsons. She was stunned that the AFIP
    inquiry focused on the actions of the whistleblowers instead of on the botched
    examination of Brown’s body. Janoski says a naval criminal investigator told
    her the original x- rays of Brown’s head “showed a lead snowstorm.” Janoski
    then located photographs she had taken of the original x-rays and gave them to
    Cogswell to review. That is how the story began.

    In the following interview by The Laissez Faire City Times, Janoski gives a
    detailed account of the events surrounding the botched investigation into Ron
    Brown’s death and the subsequent efforts by AFIP to punish the

    QUESTION: According to published reports, Lt. Col. Cogswell said the
    original x-rays of Brown’s head showed possible metal fragments in the head
    consistent with a gunshot wound. Is that true?

    JANOSKI: The original x-rays, which I thought were the only set of x-rays,
    showed what appeared to be metal fragments inside the skull, similar to a
    bullet breaking up. I photographed those x-rays when they were up in the light

    QUESTION: AFIP’s explanation for that was that the x- ray cassette was
    defective. One of my relatives is a radiologist. I asked him about that some
    months ago. He said he thought it was possible that could be the explanation.
    What is your response?

    JANOSKI: That cannot really be the explanation because it only surfaced
    after Chris Ruddy broke the story. Lt. Colonel David Hause was one of the
    forensic pathologists who were examining the bodies and doing whatever
    autopsies were going to be done. At no time did anyone come up to him and
    say, “We have this problem with the x-ray cassette and you need to be on the
    lookout for it.”

    QUESTION: Would that have been standard procedure – – if you were having
    a problem with an x-ray cassette someone would have given the pathologists
    a heads-up to discount any recurring pattern or problem like that?

    JANOSKI: Well, I would expect a little more attention to detail than that. If it
    was indeed a defective x- ray cassette they should have just thrown it in the
    trash. Since not all the bodies were getting autopsies, and since the
    examination results were going to be based on x-rays, if they truly did
    discover this problem with the x-ray cassette Dr. Hause would have been
    apprised of that, and he was not. Cogswell, Hause and I all talked about this.
    But this phony explanation about a defective x-ray cassette did not surface
    until Ruddy broke the story.

    QUESTION: So you don’t believe the story of the defective x-ray cassette?

    JANOSKI: No. About 6 months after the crash I had a conversation with
    Jeanmarie Sentell, a naval criminal investigative agent. She told me the first
    set of head x-rays on Ron Brown were deliberately destroyed because they
    showed a lead snowstorm. I said, “What are you talking about?” She
    explained to me what a lead snowstorm is: metal fragments breaking up from
    a bullet. And she proceeded to tell me that the first set of x-rays was
    deliberately destroyed and a second set was taken. The exposure was changed
    in an attempt to eradicate or diminish the metal fragments.

    When I went on the record with Ruddy, he put that in the story in an article on
    January 13. He called Sentell and told her what I was saying. I believe she
    had no comment, or said she could not comment. So she was aware of what I
    had told Ruddy.

    QUESTION: Have you spoken to her since?

    JANOSKI: No, because once that story broke I was ostracized. I was the last
    one to go on the record. They weren’t treating me that well, but not as bad as
    Cogswell, Hause and Parsons.

    QUESTION: Who is “they”?

    JANOSKI: The Armed Forces Medical Examiner, Dr. Jerry Spencer. Also, a
    lot of people in the office were avoiding me. There were two factions in the
    office, and you knew who was on which side in this issue.

    Anyway, it was at that point, after the NCIS agent told me this that I went back
    to my office and pulled out the 35 millimeter slides I had taken when the
    x-rays were up on the light box. I had photographed them when they were in
    the light box. I had done that because I was testing out the exposure system on
    my Nikon F4. It has three exposure systems. I had just gotten out of the FBI
    Academy for a 2-week school for police photography. It was drilled into our
    heads to shoot the hell out of everything. If you ever have a doubt about the
    value of a particular photo, take it anyway. You might see something you think
    is innocuous at a crime scene, but it may be important later. Film is cheap. All
    these concepts were drilled into our heads. So I was taking a lot of pictures of
    this particular crash, or rather, the events at Dover.

    I also told Larry Klayman at one time that something had bothered me about
    this crash. It was a nagging feeling in the pit of my stomach. One of the things
    that bothered me was we had a dead cabinet member, but some people
    seemed to think it was not a big deal. But you don’t get a dead cabinet member
    every day.

    QUESTION: Did Ms. Sentell tell you who destroyed the first x-rays?

    JANOSKI: No. She didn’t tell me.

    QUESTION: Did she tell you if she saw them being destroyed?

    JANOSKI: No, she didn’t tell me that.

    QUESTION: So she might have seen it or she might have only heard about it?
    Or she could have even been the one who destroyed them?

    JANOSKI: All of those are possible, yes. She is a sworn law enforcement
    officer. She was telling me that a piece of evidence was destroyed. I was so
    stunned by it. I was also stunned when she said there was another set of
    x-rays. The only set I saw was the one up in the light box in the morgue. If
    there truthfully was a second set taken, I don’t know when that happened. It
    would have to have been after Ron Brown’s body left the morgue. When his
    body was in the morgue, and his x- rays were up in the light box, they didn’t
    take his body out of the room. And nobody said to me, “We are going to take
    this body because we need a second set of x-rays.”

    QUESTION: Where did Ron Brown’s body go after it left the morgue?

    JANOSKI: When I saw it leave the morgue it went over to the next room,
    where the bodies are embalmed. I didn’t see it actually get embalmed. But I
    saw the gurney being rolled over there.

    QUESTION: Could it have been taken from that room to be x-rayed again?

    JANOSKI: This is only my opinion. I would think that if another set of head
    x-rays were taken, it was probably then, when it left the morgue.

    QUESTION: When it left the morgue to go into the other room?

    JANOSKI: Yes.

    QUESTION: What is the other room called?

    JANOSKI: That was the embalming station. At Dover there are stations. The
    first station is intake; the second was FBI fingerprinting; the third was dental;
    the fourth was full body x-ray. There was no number five. Six was the morgue
    area; seven was anthropology, which was in the morgue. Eight was
    embalming; then dressing and wrapping; then casketing.

    QUESTION: What was anthropology?

    JANOSKI: We have a forensic anthropologist. If we have a crash with total
    body fragmentation, he will try to match up what’s there.

    QUESTION: That was not necessary in Ron Brown’s case, was it?

    JANOSKI: Oh no, Ron Brown’s body was intact.

    QUESTION: Was Ron brown’s body found in a crawling position?

    JANOSKI: From what I understand he was found outside the plane on the
    rocks and the underbrush. He was in a “dead cockroach” position.

    QUESTION: Was he lying on his back?

    JANOSKI: He was on his back in the photograph I saw. His arms and legs
    were up in the air. Perhaps he landed outside of the plane on his stomach.
    Maybe someone came by and turned him over on his back. It was as if rigor
    mortis had set in, with the arms and legs slightly up.

    QUESTION: Does that sound like a natural death pose for a person, lying on
    your back with your arms and legs up, because that’s the way you fell out of
    the plane?

    JANOSKI: Well, you’d have to ask Cogswell that question, because he’s the
    plane crash expert. But to me this isn’t a natural death at all. They found he
    died of blunt force injury, but even that is not accurate. You need an autopsy
    to get the precise cause of death.

    QUESTION: How many x-rays are in Ron Brown’s file currently?

    JANOSKI: There are 15 x-rays in Ron Brown’s file – – arms, legs, pelvis,
    stuff like that. He had a broken pelvis, but when you look at the x-rays
    actually in his file, none of the injuries were serious enough to kill him. That’s
    especially why Ron Brown needed an autopsy. He might have an internal
    decapitation, a ripped aorta, or bleeding into the chest cavity. That’s why you
    do autopsies – – to find out the exact cause and manner of death.

    QUESTION: Would it have been ordinary, even without the head wound, for
    a person of his stature coming in with those apparent injuries in the x-rays to
    have an autopsy?

    JANOSKI: I would say good forensic pathology would have caused an
    autopsy to occur, regardless of who he was. He needed an autopsy plain and
    simple. It is a gross miscarriage of good forensic investigation that he did not
    get one. You could have a homeless guy dead on the streets of D.C., and he’s
    going to get an autopsy. Yet we have a dead cabinet member without one?

    QUESTION: Some might say too many bodies came through that day, that it
    was not possible to do autopsies.

    JANOSKI: That’s baloney. I was told there was a lot of pressure from the
    White House to get the bodies out.

    QUESTION: Can you say who told you that?

    JANOSKI: Yes. It was an investigator by the name of Bob Veasey. He told
    me there was a lot of pressure from the White House to get the bodies out.

    QUESTION: Did that mean to get them buried?

    JANOSKI: Get them in, get them out. Get them into the embalming and
    casketing area. Get them out of the morgue.

    QUESTION: Was he more specific than just the White House? Might he have
    mentioned a name?

    JANOSKI: No. I was also told I was taking too long to take photographs.
    There was a real hurry to move this guy out. I was the senior photographer,
    and I had 4 guys working for me. Being in the navy so long, I had the feeling
    the senior person has the responsibility, but they also have the accountability.
    I decided I was going to photograph Ron Brown’s body. If something
    happened like somebody’s film didn’t turn out, I didn’t want them to have to
    bear that burden. So I took it upon myself. Since I didn’t want to be the
    photographer whose film didn’t turn out, with a dead cabinet member, and I’d
    have to look for another day job, I was very careful in what I did. I took a lot
    of photographs. I figured, if this role of film gets destroyed in processing, I’m
    going to have another roll of film to back it up. I was determined we wouldn’t
    have something similar to Vince Foster’s crime scene, where everything
    comes out underexposed.

    QUESTION: How long had you worked for these people who you
    characterize as being in a different faction on this?

    JANOSKI: I had been in the Medical Examiner’s office a little less than a

    QUESTION: Had there ever been another occasion where the staff had split
    like this over a procedure? Had there been an occasion where Hause,
    Cogswell and Parsons had taken one position and everyone else had taken
    another one?

    JANOSKI: No. Let me go back a bit. I had been there 2 1/2 years when the
    story actually broke. So I had worked in this office 2 1/2 years when the
    office split into two factions. There would sometimes be disagreements on
    cases, but nothing of this magnitude.

    QUESTION: Had there ever been any indication that the White House was
    exerting pressure in any case before this?

    JANOSKI: Not that I know of. The actual team leader of this mission was a
    Navy commander by the name of Edward Kilbane. He had actually gone to the
    West Wing of the White House before the bodies came to Dover. I saw him in
    his dress blue uniform, and I asked him why he was all dressed up. And he
    said he had to go to the West Wing of the White House.

    QUESTION: What was his role, exactly?

    JANOSKI: He was the team leader. When we went out on a plane crash or
    terrorist bombing, we called it a mission. We would have one person in
    charge. He was the one making sure the motel reservations were made and he
    would coordinate with federal agencies. He was your point of contact.

    QUESTION: Did he go to the site in Croatia?

    JANOSKI: No, Cogswell was the one who went to Croatia.

    QUESTION: Did anyone else go to Croatia?

    JANOSKI: One of my photographers also went – – Ron Kikel. Cogswell had
    seen the body briefly at station 2 [7]. The head wound was not noticed at that
    time. It was noticed at the morgue, when I opened up my big mouth.

    QUESTION: What did you say?

    JANOSKI: I said, “Wow, look at the hole in Ron Brown’s head.”

    QUESTION: Why did Edward Kilbane have that visit to the White House?

    JANOSKI: I would say it was probably some kind of meeting to coordinate
    bringing the bodies back. That’s my opinion. Larry Klayman got some FOIA
    documents from Commerce. Some of the documents concern this crash and
    points of contact and so forth. There was a meeting, I believe it was before
    the bodies came back, to plan everything.

    QUESTION: Was that in the White House?

    JANOSKI: I believe the FOIA document said West Wing, but I’m sure it said
    White House. I don’t have it handy right now.

    QUESTION: Was that the meeting Kilbane attended?

    JANOSKI: Yes.

    QUESTION: Had you worked with Kilbane for sometime?

    JANOSKI: Yes.

    QUESTION: Did you find him to be trustworthy?

    JANOSKI: No.

    QUESTION: In what sense no?

    JANOSKI: I often had difficulty with him. If I needed a decision made, he
    would come back and say, “Let me think about that and I’ll get back to you.”
    And he never would. I’d have to keep pestering him for an answer. I always
    had the impression that his decision was going to be made on political
    correctness – – whichever way the prevailing winds were blowing. It wasn’t
    going to be made on right or wrong.

    QUESTION: Where is AFIP located?

    JANOSKI: It’s located in Washington. The main building is on the Walter
    Reed Hospital Complex. In August of 1996 the Medical Examiner’s Office
    and Toxicology moved out to Rockville, Maryland.

    QUESTION: How did people come to be stationed there? Did the White
    House have an opportunity to plant people there?

    JANOSKI: No.

    QUESTION: So all these people were there long before the Ron Brown crash

    JANOSKI: Right.

    QUESTION: What would be the motive for those who did not want to pursue
    this issue? Was it just to protect Gormley, or could there have been a different

    JANOSKI: There could have been.

    QUESTION: But you don’t know of one?

    JANOSKI: I don’t know. I always thought a lot of what happened was laziness
    and incompetence and stupidity. But what concerned me was the military
    hammered us so quickly when the story broke that I had to think maybe there
    was more to this than I thought.

    QUESTION: People I have talked to who are in the military say you guys
    should have expected the treatment you got because you broke the chain of
    command. You went outside the military to make statements. How would you
    respond to that?

    JANOSKI: We realized the chain of command was not going to work in this
    case. Gormley was an Air Force Colonel. He had been in that office for
    fifteen years. He knew better. He should have done an autopsy. He should
    have gotten permission. I have a naval criminal investigator telling me that
    evidence was destroyed. This was not a normal situation where you have a
    problem aboard ship, where you go up through your chain of command.

    You have to look at the bigger picture in this episode. Ron Brown was under
    investigation. Nolanda Hill had testified about the selling of seats on trade
    missions for donations to the Democratic National Committee. Everyone had
    heard about John Huang. This is not textbook “how to be a good petty officer”
    stuff. We were naive. We had no idea we could get in so much trouble for
    telling the truth.

    QUESTION: Would Gormley to your knowledge have had any motive for not
    having conducted an autopsy as he should have?

    JANOSKI: For a long time I thought he was just being lazy. An autopsy would
    have required a bit of work on his part.

    QUESTION: You don’t think that anymore?

    JANOSKI: If I look at the big picture I don’t think it is that innocent and that

    QUESTION: Gormley is probably not the kind of person who follows
    Judicial Watch, and knows that Nolanda Hill had given testimony that Ron
    Brown told her seats on Commerce missions had been sold for contributions.
    Is that correct?

    JANOSKI: No, he wouldn’t have known.

    QUESTION: So what motive could he have for covering up?

    JANOSKI: You’d have to ask him that question.

    QUESTION: But you don’t know of a motive he might have had?

    JANOSKI: No. There are a lot of unanswered questions here. The whole
    office needs to be hauled in for depositions.

    QUESTION: Do you know if it will be?

    JANOSKI: I don’t know.

    QUESTION: Do you have any kind of a lawsuit against AFIP?

    JANOSKI: My lawyer will be filing one later this year.

    QUESTION: Just one more time here: to your knowledge, Gormley was not a
    White House plant in the office?

    JANOSKI: No. That’s giving him far too much credit.

    QUESTION: And nobody had contacted him, to your knowledge, to tell him to
    lay off of this?

    JANOSKI: I don’t know.

    QUESTION: And you don’t know if anyone else had been contacted by the
    White House, except Kilbane, who had gone to a meeting in the White House?

    JANOSKI: No, I was told by Bob Veasey there was a lot of pressure to get
    these bodies out.

    QUESTION: Pressure applied to whom?

    JANOSKI: He didn’t say.

    QUESTION: How were you punished for coming forward with the others?

    JANOSKI: I was given 32 hours to clear out my office. I was not given any
    reason why I was being reassigned, even though I asked for it, via phone ,
    email, and in person.

    QUESTION: Would it be normal procedure to explain to you why you were
    being reassigned, wouldn’t it?

    JANOSKI: Yes, if it was a question of poor work performance, good
    leadership and management dictates that someone sits down and says, “Chief,
    were not happy with your work performance, we’re going to reassign you.”
    Usually it is written down. It is a counseling session. That’s the way we do
    things in the Navy.

    QUESTION: One would think that military procedure would require some
    kind of a meeting to explain this to you. Is it required?

    JANOSKI: I’m not so sure it’s required, but it’s almost custom. Good
    leadership and management is inherent in the military. I was given a list of
    things I had to do before I left, but I was never given a reason why I was
    reassigned. I was chief of forensic photography for the Office of the Armed
    Forces Medical Examiner. I was responsible for myself and four other
    photographers. I sent them all over the world to photograph aircraft accidents,
    autopsies, murders, and terrorist bombings. I was responsible for $250,000 of
    photographic equipment. I was also the government credit card holder for the
    office. I was spending $100,000 for photographic paper and supplies. So this
    quick transfer disrupted everything.

    I had a $250,000 inventory of Nikon Gear – – lenses, you name it – – 282
    items. I was not given enough time to turn this inventory over to someone else
    before I was going to be booted out the door or denied access. Since the
    Army owns AFIP, as far as the Army was concerned I was still responsible
    for all of this equipment, since I had signed for all of it. I was afraid that these
    people were trying to set me up, that I would walk out the door and half of
    this stuff would show up in some pawnshop in Southeast D.C. So before I left
    I filed a complaint with the Army Inspector General’s Office, against these
    senior executive civilians, who gave me my marching orders.

    QUESTION: Who was that?

    JANOSKI: Dr. Florabel Mullick. When Cogswell and I were given our
    marching orders, Spencer and Gormley were not there. My chain of command
    within that office was not there. They had a senior Army civilian give us our
    marching orders.

    QUESTION: Did they have someone lined up to take your position?

    JANOSKI: No, no. My replacement is not coming in till this month.

    QUESTION: What month was it you were booted out?

    JANOSKI: April 3rd.

    QUESTION: And so your replacement will take over in October?

    JANOSKI: Yes.

    QUESTION: Who has been managing that inventory since you have been out?

    JANOSKI: I was forced to turn it over to a military policeman who is
    stationed out there. We did that about two weeks after I was forced out.

    QUESTION: Where are you now?

    JANOSKI: I am at the main building of AFIP on Walter Reed Army Complex.
    I was assigned to a guy who is in charge of the computer people and the photo
    lab. I was stuck in a job that never existed before.

    QUESTION: So they created a job to move you out?

    JANOSKI: Yes. What they did was stick me in the corner. Chair too low,
    desk too high, fluorescent lights buzzing. And I was given this assignment to
    do, to decide if the AFIP photo lab should be contracted out. It took me a
    couple of weeks to do that. It wasn’t brain surgery. And I finally decided find
    my own niche. So I work at the customer service area of the photo lab. I wait
    on customers and input work orders into the computer. I did that on my own.

    QUESTION: What happened to the other three fellows?

    JANOSKI: Dr. Cogswell was banished to dental pathology. He is a board
    certified forensic pathologist. They stuck him in with a bunch of dentists. This
    is serious because he is being tasked to read slides of mouth tumors. He is not
    qualified to do this. Hopefully, someone goes behind him and checks his
    work. He doesn’t have enough knowledge or background to know whether
    what he is looking at under a microscope is cancerous.

    Drs. Parsons and Hause were left out there. Apparently, Dr. Jerry Spencer
    told both of them they really need to find someplace else to work. They
    weren’t allowed to go on any trips or do any autopsies. No one was talking to
    them, except maybe for my photographers. They would walk into a room and
    everybody would leave. So Dr. Hause has been transferred to Fort Leonard
    Wood in Missouri as a hospital pathologist. Major Parsons was transferred to
    Andrews Air Force base as a hospital pathologist. So they are not working in
    their specific fields.

    QUESTION: Do you think this mystery surrounding Ron Brown’s death will
    ever be cleared up?

    JANOSKI: I have no idea. It’s almost as if no one cares that he is dead, and
    that 34 other people died. There seems to be such a lack of interest in this.
    People should just take the time to read Ruddy’s stories or talk to us. When
    was the last time you saw four senior military people essentially put their
    careers on the line for something they believed in?

    QUESTION: I don’t remember ever seeing that.

    JANOSKI: Exactly. I have almost 23 years in the Navy. Does anyone really
    think I would throw that down the toilet on just a whim? I’ve worked too hard
    to get where I am. I’m getting ready to retire. Why would I throw all that away
    for some wild-eyed conspiracy theory? I was there. I was the one who saw
    the body. I was the one who photographed the body. I know what I saw; I
    know what I photographed; and I know what people told me.

    QUESTION: Was there any evidence of foul play with the other bodies that
    came through?

    JANOSKI: Not any of the other ones. I know there are a lot of people who
    think Shelly Kelly had a four inch cut over her femoral artery. She didn’t.

    QUESTION: That was the stewardess?

    JANOSKI: Yes.

    QUESTION: And the story that went around was she survived the crash and
    was walking around. She got on a helicopter, then ended up dead before she
    got to the hospital. That story is not true, then?

    JANOSKI: This is a question. She wasn’t walking around anywhere. She had
    a broken neck, up around C1 or C2, which is really high up. Also, she had a
    broken leg or two. When Cogswell got to the crash site, he asked people,
    “Where was Shelly Kelly found? Was she found in the plane, was she found
    outside the plane, did she walk to the helicopter?” He got as many different
    answers as the number of people he asked.

    QUESTION: These were all people who were on the scene and would have
    been eyewitnesses to this?

    JANOSKI: Not to the crash. If I am not mistaken, the Americans did not get
    there until about 12 hours later.

    QUESTION: I thought I read that some troops were airlifted in there pretty

    JANOSKI: That’s what I’ve heard, but I don’t know if it’s true or not.

    QUESTION: So he got a number of different stories about her condition?

    JANOSKI: Yes.

    QUESTION: But she did not have a slash on her femoral artery?

    JANOSKI: Cogswell and I have talked about that. We think that may have
    been an artifact of embalming that someone saw. In embalming they use the
    femoral arteries to shoot embalming fluid in.

    QUESTION: I saw you guys on CBN. It was you and Cogswell as I
    remember. You were dressed up in your dress uniforms. Were there any
    repercussions immediately after that?

    JANOSKI: No, that was after we got shitcanned out of the building. It was
    kind of weird. AFIP figured if they ignored the story it would just go away. I
    think they were just hoping we would drop off the face of the earth. But then
    CBN went ahead, and they replayed that same story again, I think it was back
    in July.

    The Ron Brown story may die down for awhile, but it’s going to resurface
    again. There is always going to be controversy surrounding this case, because
    the Armed Forces Institute of Pathology did not do its job. Plain and simple, it
    did not do its job.

    QUESTION: Do you think the body will ever be exhumed and autopsied?

    JANOSKI: I don’t know.

    QUESTION: Many people have said that there was no bullet evident in the
    x-rays. Clarence Page made a lot about this in a column he wrote back in
    January, which was obviously a propaganda piece designed to put the matter
    to rest.

    JANOSKI: There was what appeared to be metal fragments inside the head.
    Also, significantly, there was no test for gunshot residue done around the head
    wound. Also, Dr. Gormley did not look for an exit wound.

    QUESTION: That was Page’s point, that no exit wound was found, and x-rays
    of the body cavity did not reveal the bullet.

    JANOSKI: You are not going to find an exit wound if you don’t look for it.

    QUESTION: So, there could have been an exit wound somewhere down on
    the torso?

    JANOSKI: Yes, possibly around the genital area or the buttocks.

    QUESTION: Was the body turned over on the table?

    JANOSKI: Yes, but he did not probe the genital area for an exit wound.
    Cogswell says an exit wound often can be nothing more than a very small slit
    in the skin. You have to walk your fingers along while you’re pulling the skin
    apart to find it. We are very careful. We say it looks like a bullet hole, and is
    consistent with a bullet hole. But without an autopsy, we will never know for
    sure – – we can’t say it was and we can’t say it wasn’t.

    QUESTION: At this late stage, would an autopsy reveal an exit wound in the

    JANOSKI: I don’t know, he’s been embalmed and in the ground for awhile.
    That is a question for a forensic pathologist.

    QUESTION: You have retained Larry Klayman and Judicial Watch as
    counsel. Why have you done that?

    JANOSKI: There was an internal investigation convened almost immediately.
    I was given a list of questions I had to answer. Most of the questions
    pertained to how Ruddy got the story. Cogswell , Hause, and Parsons got
    similar questions. When I was given the questions by the investigative officer,
    I said, “You need to interview two of my guys who were up at Dover,” and I
    gave him their names. I had 4 photographers who had worked for me up at
    Dover. The investigating officer had never talked to them. The more Hause,
    Parsons, Cogswell and I talked among ourselves, the more we realized this
    internal investigation was a farce, and it was targeted against us. We used the
    photographers as a litmus test. As long as they were never interviewed, then
    we knew we were the targets.

    QUESTION: What was the role of the photographers?

    JANOSKI: They were photographing the other bodies.

    QUESTION: And so any real investigation would have gotten to them?

    JANOSKI: Yes. I was given this list of questions, so I went to see a couple of
    Navy lawyers down at the Washington Navy Yard. These schmucks had been
    watching too many episodes of JAG. One of them said, “It’s not news unless
    it’s in the Washington Post.” They took a very cavalier attitude about all this.
    I got the feeling that something was not right. So I told the investigating officer
    I was not going to make a statement. He said, “On advice of counsel?” And I
    said, “I didn’t say that, I’m just not going to make a statement.” A couple of
    weeks later he called me at home and in a very threatening tone and manner,
    said, “I want to see you in my office tomorrow at 8:30. You may want to
    invoke your right to legal counsel.” At that point I was afraid I was being
    charged with something.

    I knew I hadn’t done anything, but that doesn’t make any difference if they want
    to railroad you. At that point I called Larry Klayman and said, “Help!” Larry
    and one of the other attorneys went in with me the next day. I retained Larry as
    legal counsel that day. He had a conversation with the Army JAG officer at
    AFIP. He asked him, “What is going to happen to Ms. Janoski if she doesn’t
    answer your questions?” He said, “Well, she’ll probably be court-martialed.”
    And Larry asked, “What is the worst that could happen to her?” The Jag
    officer said, “Theoretically, she could get the death penalty.” This is all in
    writing. Larry will back me up on this. So I invoked Article 31 of the Uniform
    Code of Military Justice. It’s similar to taking the 5th.

    In this whole process I was never read my rights. I was never told that I had a
    right to remain silent. I was never apprised of Article 31 of the UCMJ. The
    investigating officer probably figured I was the weak link. He probably
    thought that since I was female and enlisted and close to retirement, they were
    going to hammer me to make me talk. God only knows what I was going to
    say. So when they told me I could invoke legal counsel, that’s when I went to

    QUESTION: Why would they threaten you like that?

    JANOSKI: It was bullying and intimidation to find out some facts and to try to
    keep me from talking to the press.

    QUESTION: According to information I’ve seen, Mr. Klayman may be
    bringing suit on your behalf under a whistle blower’s act. Is that true?

    JANOSKI: Yes, he’s looking into that.

    QUESTION: What would be the complaint on your part?

    JANOSKI: The fact that I was punished for going on the record with the
    Pittsburgh Tribune. I see my situation as somewhat similar to Frederick
    Whitehurst, when he sued the FBI over the crime lab allegations.

    QUESTION: Is there anything we’ve left out?

    JANOSKI: The Indian medicine kit. Sentell came up to me when we were at
    Dover and said, “I’ve got something sensitive for you to photograph.” And she
    brought this thing out that looked like a burrito to me. She called it an Indian
    magic kit. She said it was in the diplomatic pouch, and it belonged to Ron
    Brown. She had me photograph it. It was a chamois tied up and inside there
    was an arrowhead, a half-smoked cigarette, a feather, some red beads, and a
    couple of turquoise stones. So I took a picture of it closed, with a ruler for
    scale. And I took a picture of it open with the ruler. I asked her what she was
    going to do with it. She said, “Air Force Mortuary Affairs will hang onto it
    for 90 days, and if the family doesn’t ask for it back, they will destroy it.”

    This is important because we don’t destroy personal effects. It doesn’t make
    any difference what you find on the body, whether it is naked pictures or
    phone numbers or whatever. Everything goes back to the family, because we
    do not have the right to censor. If you take something out to avoid
    embarrassing the family and they knew it was there, they are going to wonder
    what the hell is going on. So you don’t destroy personal effects. So why
    weren’t they giving it back regardless?

    When I was photographing it I said of the half-smoked cigarette, “Wow, do
    you think this is a joint?” And she didn’t answer me. She was dead serious.
    Anyway, in June of 1997 there was an article in the New Yorker Magazine
    about Nolanda Hill. In it she talks about this Indian medicine kit. She’s the one
    who gave it to Ron Brown. And I asked Hause and Parsons, “How could the
    family ask for it back if Nolanda Hill is the one who gave it to him?” Then,
    earlier this year, I was told by someone who was at Dover that Bob Veasey
    had destroyed it because it was too embarrassing. And I believe Sentell also
    had something to do with destroying it.

    That was stupid on their part, because when I took pictures of it I took it on
    negative film. It’s page 132 of the proof sheets on the crash. The title of it is
    “Ronald Brown’s Personal Effects.” If they destroy the negatives and the proof
    sheets they are really stupid, because the proof sheets will be out of
    sequential order.

    Second, did she have the authority to go into the diplomatic pouch? Tim
    Maier from Insight Magazine asked me if there were quid pro quo documents
    in the pouch – – who gave donations and who went on the trade missions. I
    said, “I don’t know.” You have to ask yourself the question, what else came
    out of that pouch?

    The fact that the Indian medicine kit was destroyed shows the mind set of the
    office. This office is supposed to have the utmost honesty in death
    investigations. You don’t take sides. You don’t go in to do an autopsy
    investigation because you want to support the cops or the D.A. You go in with
    an open mind, and the only thing you are interested in is finding out the facts.
    By destroying the Indian medicine kit, it shows the mind set that if something
    is embarrassing, we’ll just get rid of it. Now we have to ask, what else did
    they destroy?

  3. NOBODY is going to be allowed to “drive any damned coffin nails” into a “preconceived New World Order (of a one-sided sort). We have over 50 million veterans, most of them combat trained, and most of them more than able to (still) kick serious ass. Are you “sick & tired” of dealing with these frigging “Domestic Enemies?” We The People ARE THE DAMNED MILITIA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! That means WE THE PEOPLE can “simply take them down, OUT of office and into a jail cell (not one of theirs …one of OUR cells. Anyone here think that even 25 million, armed and trained (or untrained) veterans couldn’t permanently render DC a ghost town overnight? We The People RUN this country via elected leaders. These leaders have largely failed us, screwed us over and now intend to kill our asses.
    Dunno about you folks, but I’m going to fight just as soon as I have my cross-hairs where they belong. As a 100% disabled veteran, I’ve given over 35years of my life to The USA (and her people). DAMNED IF I AM GOING TO LAY DOWN MY ARMS AND WATCH ALL THE BLOOD SWEAT AND TEARS GO TO WASTE! (I’m not nearly crazy ….not yet anyway). However, these domestic enemies seek to “retrain your minds” (or just kill ya if it’s more convenient for them).
    Doesn’t this bother the shit out of anyone except me?
    Let’s get our shit together and then “oust” the “sobs” who have placed us in greater peril than I care to dwell upon. It seems logical to me that the very first thing that needs doing is taking back this country from the murderers we have elected (or so they say we elected them). THEN we can rebuild without having to put up with the likes of them seeking to “give the USA away” to the highest bidders …and we’ll eliminate OUR leaders constantly attempting to disarm us using lies lies and more lies, false this and that. Come on folks …are we really going to sit on our asses and actually LET THEM GET AWAY WITH THIS BULLSHIT?
    Count me out. I intend to shoot. I may well die from “return fire” …but I’ll damn sure leave this world saying that “I tried.”
    Whoever at OathKeepers is “keeping tabs”, I request that you put me down as a “wanna-be member.” (Active member for North Carolina …but can travel (literally) anywhere with no-prior notice needed).
    I am sure everyone is aware now that ALL OF THE EMAILS between Hillary and Obama are not going to be released until BamBam is “out of office.” (That way he can’t be impeached). It also surely sounds suspicious …as though Hillary already has been elected …and the votes we make are “just for looks.” …and the media feeds us full of ‘bs’ …to promote THEIR agendas. And, We The People just keep sitting, and doing little to nothing. I just do not understand …unless everyone has turned-tail and would rather be enslaved and live than “live free or die?” Maybe so, since there is little evidence to the contrary. (These people are ELECTED …they are NOTHING)! We The People placed them there ….we can oust them just as easily …might take a few Glocks and AR’s, but they’ll take the hint don’t ya think folks?

    Never too old to kick ass…

  4. I like the way you think BUD. Highflight took about 20,000 words to say nothing of any importance as there will never ever be anything done about the Clintons through the just system. You on the other hand have put forth a very simple solution to the problem with a scant few words of total simplicity and workability.
    I think you hit the nail on the head. We can bring up all the old stuff as needed AFTER we lock them up and right before we hang them for treason. After a fair trial of course.

  5. After a fair trial of course, that was SOOOOO funny to me. Can you imagine waking up every morning to a face like that?

  6. Mr. Elias Alias in his commentary for this article criticizes Presidents both past and present, both Dems and from the GOP.

    1. Jennings,
      Thank you for noticing that I point the finger of accusation at all four immediately past and current Presidents. A much larger agenda is afoot in America since G.H.W. Bush-41 signed onto the UN’s Agenda 21 program in the early 1990s. Both parties have supported our military-industrial complex abroad and the tyranny staring us in the face domestically, beginning with the war on drugs and expanding into the so-called war on terror. Both parties have supported a massive misperception in the public mind, imo. That is my personal opinion.
      Thank you for reading here and leaving your comments.
      Elias Alias, editor

  7. Bill Clinton and Janet Reno are alleged to have conspired with the ATF and FBI to bring down the FBI Maury building in Oklahoma City (False Flag) and if you noticed…one of the 25 or so suspicious deaths involving Clinton, was in the building on the day it was bombed.

    “A new documentary has been released regarding the Oklahoma City bombing on April 19, 1995, which shows with copious evidence that the bombing was not the act of one man, Timothy McVeigh, but that McVeigh was but a mind-controlled patsy for sinister forces within the U.S. government who wanted to use that event as a pretext to finally pass Bill Clinton’s Anti-Terrorism bill, which would not have passed without something of that magnitude to spur it.”–_Bombing_was_a_False_Flag_Event

    Obviously, from watching the Clinton Chronicles, the Clintons are capable of doing anything they want…and are we to see more coming our way when Hillary gets the crown?

    I smell a revolution stirring when anything and everything will be considered.

Comments are closed.