Agreed, the Huawei story is so much more complex than just Trump throwing a hissy fit.
The first report into Huawei from the Heritage Foundation dates back to 2008, when Trump was still raping people buying "education" at Trump University, women and reality TV viewers.
There are essentially three different American groups with their own reasons for having issues with Huawei. Different timelines too.
1) The Heritage Foundation and some people in Congress, based on sources in the US intelligence community about spying and backdoors. Their first report on Huawei dates back to 2008.
2) The US State Department and Department of Justice for Huawei using a front company called SkyCom to evade sanctions on selling communications equipment to Iran. It emerged in 2013 that the reported "well-known company" behind SkyCom (and that hitherto been publicly referred to under a code name) was in fact Huawei. Obviously the investigators and prosecutors in that case will have known that it was Huawei years before 2013.
3) Donald Trump who has a purely commercial reasons to dislike Huawei (as they are Chinese) and started his trade war in 2017.
All these three groups have the same target but are frequently at loggerheads. Groups 1 and 2 don't understand that Trump would have no issue allowing Huawei in the US if he can trade it off in same trade deal. Trump doesn't care about national security or courts so sees no objection to making Huawei part of some mercantilist deal with Xi Jinping. Group 2 has issues with 1 and 3 for not following legal process and the requirements around discovery and transparency that are vital for a prosecution. Groups 1 and 3 don't care much for legal process and think that Group 2 is slow and too open.
If Trump were to be replaced later this year only Group 3 would likely vanish from the scene. I doubt Group 1 would suddenly stop and Group 2 would definitely not stop.