So in case you missed it, the wingnutosphere was outrageously outraged over Bob Woodward saying on CNN last night that he had received an email from the White House telling him he would “regret” questioning the White House version over how the sequester came to be.

Of course the wingnutosphere went straight into overdrive - Sean Hannity called it an example of “intimidation” by a “demagogue president”:

But, the emails actually turned out to be quite cordial, as published in Politico:

But I do truly believe you should rethink your comment about saying saying that Potus asking for revenues is moving the goal post. I know you may not believe this, but as a friend, I think you will regret staking out that claim. The idea that the sequester was to force both sides to go back to try at a big or grand barain with a mix of entitlements and revenues (even if there were serious disagreements on composition) was part of the DNA of the thing from the start. It was an accepted part of the understanding — from the start. Really. It was assumed by the Rs on the Supercommittee that came right after: it was assumed in the November-December 2012 negotiations. There may have been big disagreements over rates and ratios — but that it was supposed to be replaced by entitlements and revenues of some form is not controversial. (Indeed, the discretionary savings amount from the Boehner-Obama negotiations were locked in in BCA: the sequester was just designed to force all back to table on entitlements and revenues.)

Man, I bet Woodward is sleeping with a light on now.

In all seriousness, what’s strange about this story is that Woodward himself got the ball rolling, as Media Matters details here.

Talking Points Memo has a detailed timeline of the “dust up” here.