The article has great context, but it looks like a patchwork of quotes and sources from other outlets. I was suspicious about the whole piece, because I could not be sure about the credibility of all the outlets mentioned. It's a lazy way of doing journalism, supporting your work on other author's research, not looking for real sources.

Although I am disturbed by the content of the article I have to appreciate that the author maintained an unbiased stance while relating the actions against Trump. A larger context would have pointed out that most of Trump's base disagree with these actions and that Trump left office with a 51% approval rating.