Every government is always able to turn totalitarian. That's why voting is important. You don't vote for the totalitarian.

Well yes, but the US was supposed to have three separate branches of government to keep each other in check.

Unfortunately turns out that in practice two of the three don't actually have any power at all when push comes to shove.

I think Congress does have power, it's just chosen not to wield it to control this presidency.

Based on what we've seen of the courts, I have doubts about that.

Congress does not have an army they can send out to enforce any law they pass, so turns out the president can simply just ignore it all without consequences. What are they going to do?

Courts don't have an army either. Only the executive has an army. Actually the president doesn't have an army. The generals have an army. You know we've never invented a system that stops the guys who have an army from taking over the guys who don't have an army, and we call it a coup d'etat, and it happens all over the world with some regularity. The best we can do is make sure the guys who have the army are guys who are committed to the wellbeing of the country.

> Courts don't have an army either. Only the executive has an army.

Exactly, that's the bug. Two of the three branches of government can only write sternly worded opinions on paper. Only one has the brute force to impose their will. So there really is only one branch of government in the US.

It was a long period of time voting for totalitarians. Checks and balances worked by design: preventing immediate radical changes. And they worked by design: allowing changes gradually over a period of time if people keep voting for the same thing. And now it's here.