CLEAN : Doping Russia Sport Minister could not have been unaware

The transcript discusses the prevalence of an issue, suggesting it was impossible for someone to be unaware of it. Despite this, the person was unaware, leading to a conclusion of complicity. The inference is drawn from the evidence examined.

What was the conclusion about the individual's awareness of the situation?

• He was misinformed.

• He was fully aware.

• He was partially aware.

• He was unaware.

What does the first section imply about the situation's prevalence?

• It was underestimated.

• It was rare.

• It was common.

• It was exaggerated.

What does the second section suggest about the individual's role in the situation?

• He was a whistleblower.

• He was an observer.

• He was complicit.

• He was a victim.

What is the main focus of the final section?

• The legal implications.

• The possible outcomes.

• The evidence examined.

• The individual's background.

What was the nature of the evidence discussed in the final section?

• It was inconclusive.

• It was fabricated.

• It was ignored.

• It was thoroughly examined.