The current US political landscape is a clear illustration of people willfully ignoring one simple truth in the world: There is no absolute "justice" or "evil". Of course for two sides in a conflict, each side will claim that justice is on their side and that they're fighting against evil, just like how the crusaders and the jihadists each claimed that their god is the true god, while both committing atrocities and acts of benevolence. Turned out they were not that different from each other after all. The lazy mainstream narrative of "justice's triumph against evil" that people have been fed since the childhood could be doing much harm, while cultures that have recently suffered defeat in major conflicts and are forced to endure the humiliation/repatriation and take very hard looks at their past, have a much more nuanced understanding of it. One piece of work that has left a permanent impression on me is the highly rated Japanese visual novel Soukou Akki Muramasa (
https://vndb.org/v2016) which explored this theme incredibly well (Unfortunately there's no English translation yet). In painting Trump (or another example, China) as simply "evil" and reducing everything via essentialism, people themselves are becoming just like what they claim to be fighting against. If you want the truth, you should never be too attached to any sort of ideological extreme. It could blind you and mislead you.
Of course, I understand that the very job of mainstream media in any country is to feed its populace a certain narrative, otherwise the media would not be doing their job. And it's apparent that "justice vs. evil" is a mode of thinking that human beings are somehow wired to perform, otherwise how can they easily justify going to war and killing "the others" without batting an eye throughout the millennia? However, for the situation to get so heated and tunnel-sighted even for a lot of highly educated people in the 21st century who are supposed to have independent and critical thinking, not to mention for an "alternative" media outlet whose founding goal was to do the exact opposite of this sort of groupthink, this really isn't a good look.
(Another somewhat tangential comment is an observation that some Europeans make about America's identity politics: How can you achieve the goal of "everybody being treated equally" while each "group" emphasizes their own identity and fights the other group(s)? This in itself is already a paradox. In Europe the idea (at least ideally) is that "if you're here you're part of us. We're all the same", e.g. the French population census never has a "ethnicity" part in it. Of course, I understand that things are really complex in the US due to the history of slavery where in the beginning the only purpose for certain ethnic groups to be there is to serve the other group, so the historic baggage and structure is somewhat intractable, while countries like Germany and Sweden who didn't manage to end up with a lot of colonies ironically can now accept different ethnicities (mostly economic migrants) somehow more easily without this historical structure in place.)