What is remarkable about where we stand is not what has changed but how much has remained the same.
Ever since Mrs May triggered Article 50 with no long term plan (supported, remember, by the Labour and Conservative Parties) it has been obvious to anybody who understood the process that we would by this point have three choices: to accept a deal from the UK Government, crash out with no-deal, or simply revoke it.
The underlying choice is rigid and will not shift until one option has been picked.
So what has changed? For much of the last two years the terms of the deal were not clear. Now they are and no amount of last minute Strasbourg bells and whistles can disguise it.
Read more: Labour won't back second referendum as MPs prepare to vote on delay
MPs standing up, one after the other, to explain why they would vote against Mrs May's deal was striking in not just its brutal disloyalty but also because those MPs were united only in condemning her deal, not what they actually want instead.
That being the case, in the absence of anything else for them to coalesce around, I actually do not think May's deal is dead yet. The capacity for a last-minute change of heart by her hardcore Brexiters is still there if they ever think that both no-deal and May's deal are being taken away.
No-deal itself is still the legal default but there is no political desire in either Brussels or London for it. This unity is reassuring though comes with a caveat. The EU will not throw Ireland under the bus and it seems the Commons will not accept a deal unless the EU does. As time ticks by the odds of no-deal therefore increase and preparations must increase. The Scottish Government’s work here must be applauded though I hope, and still think, that it is not the most likely outcome.
Read more: Brexit is 'tearing Britain apart,' says Donald Trump
That leaves us with the revocation of Article 50.
Because of the work of Jo Maugham QC and Scottish politicians from across the spectrum including myself we know this option exists from the mouth of the European Court of Justice itself. Frankly, to my mind it is now the best course.
But what of extension and referendum, I hear you ask? Well yes, it is clear there is a desire to stave off disaster in the Commons and maybe on Thursday they will vote to request an extension.
It is even possible the EU will grant it, despite the not-unreasonable question swirling around the corridors of Strasbourg this week: “What the hell will the UK do with an extension if we grant it?”
But an extension is a process story, not an end point.
On this Mrs May is right, extension does not of itself solve anything. The process to revocation may well be via a referendum, which is the SNP position.
But is there a majority for that and where in any referendum campaign would the Tories and Labour be? It seems a stretch to say there will be much in the way of party unity.
A lot can happen in 24 hours but amongst the bluster, always remember the fundamentals.
Months ago Tony Connelly of RTE said that there are series of unlikely outcomes, one of which has to happen.
That is still the case.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules here