Thread by @JolyonMaugham

Just so that those outside the Westminster bubble know, the foundation of Stephen Doughty's question is a rumour that a number of key figures in Number 10 are communicating about the real reasons for suspending Parliament using unofficial channels. 1/2 bit.ly/2zNsbdN

They are rumoured to be communicating using WhatsApp, private email and 'burner' phones. I have a list of names of those said to be involved. This is only a rumour but a number of factors make it seem credible to me.

First, the question 'what is the real reason for the suspension' is absolutely central to whether it is legal. Second, the notes of the plans to suspend Parliament were drawn up in Number 10 *after* we sued the Government. So it has motive to tailor those notes accordingly.

Third, the notes themselves - not yet in the public domain but I understand the BBC is today making an application for them, and we will apply to get unredacted copies - are in their tone and content consistent with having been tailored to a particular purpose.

Fourth, the list of names of those involved is very specific, including some I have never heard of. Fifth, the story is consistent with what I have been given by several independent sources as the reason why Govt has not put in affidavits to explain the reasons for suspending.

(That reason is that those figures were asked by Government lawyers to sign affidavits but refused to do so because they knew they were not true and did not want to risk exposure and imprisonment for perjury.)

So, for me, what I have described as rumour has the ring of truth.

(Apols. That ended up being a thread of more than two tweets.)

Here are the specific questions a source says should be asked. Let me be very clear that I am NOT contending the predicates to the questions are true.