The U.S. may have a new Attorney General by this time next month, one who makes John Ashcroft seem like a reasonable candidate for the job. Alberto Gonzales, possibly the world’s most Hilteresque Hispanic-American, is set for confirmation and expected to get all the votes needed for appointment, even though he has still been defending his record on human rights. On Friday, Gonzales attempted to clarify some of his previous statements, including one made in a memo from September of 2001, stating, “America will feast on terrorists’ bones when the sun falls on this war.”

Gonzales, nicknamed “Francisco Franco-American” by this reporter just now, has been accused of creating the Bush White House position on human rights—summed up by the statement, “Human rights? Huh?” In his former position as White House counsel, Gonzales, miraculously keeping the president out of jail for four years, challenged that prisoners taken without evidence and without due process in the War on Terror were not subject to the same protections as other soldiers imprisoned during wartime under the codes of the Geneva conventions.

In other feats of jaw-dropping “what the fuck,” Gonzales challenged the very definitions of torture accepted around the world. Previous definitions, based on ideas of “cruel and unusual punishment,” were replaced with the even more ambiguous definition of “excruciating and agonizing pain.” At least with this definition, Ashton Kutcher movies are now officially designated torture.

“Unusual punishment? What’s so bad about unusual punishment?” defended Gonzales in Friday’s seven-hour testimony to the Senate Judiciary Committee Friday. “If I get a bare-bottom spanking from Mamie Van Doren, it might unusual, but I say that doesn’t qualify as torture. And those guys in Camp X-Ray—they got it so good it ought to be illegal. I mean, it probably would be, if it were on American soil. But you know what I mean.”

Asked if the attorney’s arguments against the Geneva conventions opened the door for the abuses at Iraq’s Abu Ghraib prison, Gonzales pretended not to hear the question. Asked again, he pretended not to know what Abu Ghraib was. After a lengthy recount of the many incidents of prisoner abuse at Abu Ghraib, Gonzales gave a more definite response.

“Nah. Probably not,” said the attorney.

Gonzales then took a firmer stance, saying the pictures of abuse, which he owned plenty of in his personal collection, were “people who were morally bankrupt having fun.” At least, continued Gonzales, it “looked like a lot of fun.”

The attorney, who had by now pitted out his entire suit with sweat, was asked to clarify the infamous statement on eating the bones of terrorists.

“I was paraphrasing the Jolly Green Giant,” answered Gonzales. “Or whoever that guy was. The one whose home was invaded by the tiny terrorist who stole his golden goose. We will use their bones, meaning the terrorists’, to butter our bread. That’s all I meant to say. I apologize if the meaning was taken that we will actually be eating the bones straight out of their bodies. I don’t believe that would be very appetizing for most Americans. Not at all. Anyway, if we do it, nobody has to watch—is that the problem here?”

Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Arlen Specter comically threw all his papers up in the air at that point, mugged for the grandstand, and told the people, “Well, I frankly don’t see a problem here…”