Oh yeah? What's one situation in which the President would have to break the law to perform their duties? The President is the Chief Executive, literally part of the job is to preserve and uphold the law of the land, not to break it.

You're absolutely wrong about the check/balance being the ballot box. The checks and balances are set up throughout the Constitution explicitly:

1. Article I (Legislative Branch):

   • Congress can pass laws, but the President can veto them (Section 7).
   • Congress can override a presidential veto with a two-thirds vote (Section 7).
   • The Senate approves presidential appointments and treaties (Section 2).

2. Article II (Executive Branch):

   • The President executes laws but needs Senate approval for treaties and appointments (Section 2).
   • The President can be impeached by the House and removed by the Senate (Section 4).

3. Article III (Judicial Branch):

   • The courts can declare laws and executive actions unconstitutional (judicial review, established by Marbury v. Madison).

Finally, the constitution makes it perfectly clear that officers of the USA are still subject to criminal laws outside of impeachment:

Article I, Section 3, Clause 7: "Judgment in Cases of Impeachment shall not extend further than to removal from Office, and disqualification to hold and enjoy any Office of honor, Trust or Profit under the United States: but the Party convicted shall nevertheless be liable and subject to Indictment, Trial, Judgment and Punishment, according to Law."

Nobody is above the law. Until now, it seems, but not because that's the way it's meant to be.

The checks and balances here are supposed to be that if you don’t like the crimes a president commits while in office, you don’t vote for them again.

If you're still allowed to vote after that president does what he does.