I'm talking about this proof and I don't understand bold part:
Theorem: Let
$f(x)=a_0+a_1x+...+a_nx^n$ be a polynomial with integer coefficients. Suppose a prime $p$ divides each of $a_0,a_1,...,a_{n−1}$ (every coefficient except the leading coefficient), and that $p^2$ does not divide $a_0$. Then $p(x)$ has no factors with integer coefficients.
Proof: Suppose $f=gh$ for polynomials $g,h$ with integer coefficients. Look at this factorization modulo $p$: we get $f(x)=a_nx^n$,
so $g(x)=b_dx^d$, $h(x)=c_ex^e$ for some constants $b_d,c_e$ and for some integers $d,e$ with $de=n$.
This implies the constant term of g(x) is a multiple of p, and similarly for the constant term of h(x), hence $p^2$ divides the constant term of f(x), a contradiction.
Let's call the coefficients of $g$ $b_i$ and of $h$ $c_i$ and suppose $g$ is of degree $r$ and $h$ of degree $s$. Then the coefficient of $x^i$ is $\sum\limits_{\alpha + \beta = i}b_\alpha c_\alpha$. This must be $0$ for $0 \leq i < n$ and $a_n$ for $i = n$. So $b_r c_s = a_n$ but why does this imply $b_\alpha$ and $b_\beta$ must be zero except for $b_r$ and $c_s$?
You've already reduced $f$ modulo $p$, a prime, so you have a monomial in a field, $\mathbb{Z}/p\mathbb{Z}$. Consequently, it must factor as a product of monomials having the stated properties of coefficients and degrees.