The cold, hard political reality is that only the SNP is placed to provide the effective political power that Scotland's cause absolutely requires.
Oversight of broadcasting is a signifier of the nationhood that the British are determined to deny to Scotland.
MacAskill is fast becoming the voice of a growing 'tendency' within the SNP that has turned to questioning the SNP leadership because all the questions that might be asked of the British state and its apparatus are now rhetorical.
My preference would have been that Nicola Sturgeon combine her role as Scotland's political leader and her role as de facto figurehead of the independence movement with a role as the 'face' of the campaign - with the SNP managing that campaign.
How does the party respond to MacAskill's allegation that the SNP relies overmuch on “self-satisfied parroting of opinion poll results” to deflect criticism. What does the party say to that? Well, apparently, a party source told The National: “Sir John Curtice is more positive about recent polling than Kenny.”. It seems this "party source" knows not the ways of irony.
The great mystery… Correction! ONE of the great mysteries is why the SNP is in this position in the first place.
Perhaps it has eluded me, but I have seen nothing relating to #indyref2 which qualifies as a timetable. In fact, the hashtag is pretty much as concrete as it gets.
The issue is simple. If there is to be a referendum in the "second half of 2020" or "before the end of 2020" then there must be a process by which that can happen. This process cannot be secret. It cannot be known only to Nicola Sturgeon and a few trusted colleagues. Options are not unlimited. If Nicola Sturgeon can work out what this process is, so can Boris Johnson's advisers.
Where Mr MacAskill and I part company is in our very different attitudes to this non-magical reality. I cannot possibly agree with his conclusion that further delay is "no bad thing".