Shameless, though I do like how he uses his paid gig at Press TV as a reason for why he's more objective than Western media outlets:

I have been more closely interested than normal in this poll. I present two weekly shows for Iranian-owned Press TV. As such, I know that, uniquely for a developing country, the Iranian broadcast media went to extraordinary lengths to be fair to all four presidential candidates...

This massive exercise took place without trouble of any kind - the polling stations were kept open longer than required to facilitate the huge lines of people outside. Indeed, that's one of the reasons I discount the opposition complaints. When a candidate is reduced to protesting that too MANY people were allowed to vote, you know he's in trouble. The counting, too, was awesome. And, by the way, there were observers from all four camps present throughout these stages...

Ahmadinejad commands the loyalty of the poor, the working class and the rural voters whose development he has championed... he is the president of an important country and we'll just have to accept it.

Yeah, he sounds really broken up about accepting the results.

Of course the voter turnout isn't Mousavi's protest at all. And it doesn't matter how late the polling places were open since those votes were never counted. And Mousavi's monitors were allowed into polling stations but were not allowed to watch the votes being tallied. And even if none of that was true - if he wasn't knocking down straw arguments - those would still all be defensive answers rather than affirmative reasons why fraud didn't happen.

Of course he doesn't address any of the bevy of other reasons to believe fraud occurred either:

Today's Washington Post does a real service with its front page story by Glenn Kessler and Jon Cohen that reviews both the plentiful "signs of fraud" in last week's disputed election in Iran, and the frustrating lack of "hard evidence" to substantiate it... The article reviews the inconclusive Terror Free Tomorrow/New America Foundation poll (that Cohen critiqued yesterday) and also goes into more detail on the various "suspicious indicators"...
* The conflicting claims and counterclaims on election night, and the "relatively consistent" margin for Ahmadinejad as official results were reported.
* The suspicion that "so many ballots were said to have been counted so quickly."
* The apparent secrecy surrounding tallies from individual polling stations and lack of vetting by representatives of opposition candidates.
* The questionable pattern of regional results, including surprisingly poor performances by opposition candidates Mousavi and Karroubi in their home provinces.

Ah well. This is the same guy who personally delivered supplies to Hamas and kissed the ground of Gaza. Why wouldn't he shamelessly shill for Ahmadinejad, following Hamas's lead but substituting inane non sequiturs for open congratulations.

References:
* You can count on the fact election was fair [Galloway]
* 'Crisis of Legitimacy' in Iran [CFR]
* On Proving Vote Fraud in Iran [Blumenthal]
* British MP Galloway kisses Gaza ground [JPost]
* Iran election news: Hamas welcomes Ahmadinejad win

Previously:
* Rabbi Lerner has Never Met an Anti-Semite He Didn't Like - Cindy Sheehan Edition
* AP: British Diplomat Who Screamed For Israel To Be Wiped Out Was "Criticizing Israel's Conduct" (Plus: British Anti-Semitism Now Kind Of An Everyday Thing)
* How Is George Galloway Different From a Bunch of Arab Dictators?