This is the very essence of the difference that should exist between a President and a King. From Federalist 69:
The President of the United States would be liable to be impeached, tried, and, upon conviction of treason, bribery, or other high crimes or misdemeanors, removed from office; and would afterwards be liable to prosecution and punishment in the ordinary course of law. The person of the king of Great Britain is sacred and inviolable; there is no constitutional tribunal to which he is amenable; no punishment to which he can be subjected without involving the crisis of a national revolution. In this delicate and important circumstance of personal responsibility, the President of Confederated America would stand upon no better ground than a governor of New York, and upon worse ground than the governors of Maryland and Delaware.
The failure of the Republican party to support this kind of check on Presidential power is why we’re having this crisis now.
I get it, but all it takes is one general with integrity, im sure thats the same odds as finding one in general population. Is it a long shot, maybe. You can still get people to do the right thing for the wrong reasons. A national hero they would become after the dust settled. Not just a footnote in some dictators playbook. Ambition can be a powerful motivator. Even if they decided to take the rains, i doubt they would be doing a worse job than our current admin. Could be wrong though. Our democracy died 30 years ago and has been a charade puppet show for the rich for far too long. What do we have to loose. I think we all know that our elections are over already.