Question

in the following passage, the character rieux is trying to determine whether he should give the journalist rambert information to publish for a story. select the best evidence to support the statement
ieux does not know whether he can trust the journalist or not.\ there may be more than one correct choice.
\i mean,\ rieux explained, \would you be allowed to publish an unqualified condemnation of the present state of things?\
\unqualified? well, no, i couldnt go that far. but surely things arent quite so bad as that?\

o,\ rieux said quietly, they werent so bad as that. he had put the question solely to find out if rambert could or couldnt state the facts without paltering with the truth. \ive no use for statements in which something is kept back,\ he added.
from albert camus, the plague. copyright 1948 by stuart gilbert

Explanation:

To support the statement that Rieux is unsure of trusting Rambert, we analyze the text. The key sentence is "He had put the question solely to find out if Rambert could or couldn't state the facts without paltering with the truth." This shows Rieux was testing Rambert's honesty (whether he'd withhold info), indicating Rieux's lack of trust initially as he needed to verify Rambert's reliability. Also, Rieux's question about publishing an unqualified condemnation and his statement "I've no use for statements in which something is kept back" further imply he's uncertain if Rambert will be truthful, so he's checking.

Answer:

The best evidence is: "He had put the question solely to find out if Rambert could or couldn't state the facts without paltering with the truth." (along with context from his question and his stance on withheld information, but the core sentence showing his attempt to verify trustworthiness is this one)