Donald Trump has picked fiery Florida congressman Matt Gaetz to be his attorney general – a man who was under investigation over sex trafficking just days ago.
Democrats have described the MAGA loyalist as “a gonzo agent of chaos” and his appointment a “red alert moment for our democracy”, while some Republican senators have also raised doubts about his suitability for the role.
It comes as Mr Trump won control of the House of Representatives, giving him full control of the government, and continues to fill out his top team.
Mr Gaetz, 42, has been under investigation by the House of Representatives’ ethics committee over allegations he was part of a scheme that led to the sex trafficking of a 17-year-old girl.
But after he resigned from Congress on Wednesday following being named as Mr Trump’s pick for attorney general, that probe has ended – without the publication of any findings.
Despite the cloud over his character – Mr Gaetz denies all allegations – he has repeatedly shown his loyalty to the president-elect, attending his hush money trial in Manhattan and vociferously calling out prosecutors.
The MAGA firebrand in the past has spread the conspiracy theory that the January 6 riots were actually orchestrated by the left-leaning group Antifa.
If he’s going to lead the Department of Justice, the Florida politician needs to be confirmed by a Senate vote like other cabinet positions. That’s where it could get difficult for him.
Advertisement
Image: The nomination is seen by some as a reward for his loyalty to Donald Trump. Pic: AP
What have Republicans said?
“I don’t think it’s a serious nomination for the attorney general,” Republican senator Lisa Murkowski said. “This one was not on my bingo card.”
Senator Susan Collins said she was “shocked” by the pick and said there would be “an awful lot of questions being asked in this case”.
Both Ms Murkowski and Ms Collins have been vocal Trump critics (the latter vowed to write fellow Republican Nikki Haley’s name on her ballot) and will be under the spotlight next year as their party retakes control of the Senate.
“I think it’s a little bit of a test,” said Republican senator Kevin Cramer.
He said he sees Mr Gaetz as a disruptive force in the House and has concerns about the “serious allegations” against him – but stopped short of saying he would not vote for him.
“It will take a lot of political capital to get him across,” he added.
Image: Mr Gaetz will need to be confirmed by a Senate vote. Pic: AP
“I’ve known Matt for a very long time, we’re friends,” said Florida senator Marco Rubio, who was nominated for secretary of state on Wednesday. “I think he would do a very good job for the president.”
Some Republican senators were reluctant to publicly criticise the incoming president’s pick to lead the justice department but did not endorse him either.
Senator John Cornyn, a member of the judiciary panel, said he did not know Mr Gaetz “other than his public persona”, and said he will not “prejudge any of these” nominations.
“I’ve got nothing for you,” said senator Katie Britt when asked by reporters. “We’ll see,” said senator Ron Johnson, when asked if he is voting for Mr Gaetz.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
1:41
Difference between Trump meeting Obama and Biden
What have Democrats said?
Unsurprisingly, Democrats in Congress have been less restrained with their reactions to Mr Gaetz’s nomination.
Veteran senator Chris Murphy declared the announcement to be “a red alert moment for our democracy”.
Representative Jim Himes meanwhile, who sits on the House Intelligence Committee, told CNN the role of attorney general requires “care, prudency, a deep respect for the rule of law… Matt Gaetz is the opposite of all of those things, he is a gonzo agent of chaos”.
Spreaker
This content is provided by Spreaker, which may be using cookies and other technologies.
To show you this content, we need your permission to use cookies.
You can use the buttons below to amend your preferences to enable Spreaker cookies or to allow those cookies just once.
You can change your settings at any time via the Privacy Options.
Unfortunately we have been unable to verify if you have consented to Spreaker cookies.
To view this content you can use the button below to allow Spreaker cookies for this session only.
Senator Richard Blumenthal, who sits on the Senate’s judiciary panel, said the nomination was the “first test of whether Republicans are willing to stand up to Donald Trump and go with conscience and conviction as opposed to just politics”.
New Mexico senator Martin Heinrich was even more blunt, posting on X: “People voted for cheaper eggs, not whatever the f@#€ this is.”
In the deep blue waters of the Caribbean, visible from space, an unremarkable grey smudge.
Image: The USS Gerald R Ford seen off the US Virgin Islands on 1 December. Credit: Copernicus
But this is the USS Gerald R Ford: the largest, most deadly aircraft carrier in the world. And it is only part of an armada, apparently set on Venezuela.
Image: The Gerald R Ford, USS Winston S Churchill, USS Mahan and USS Bainbridge in the Atlantic on 13 November. Source: US Department of Defense
From being able to count on one hand the number of warships and boats in the Caribbean, since August we can see the build-up of the number, and variety of ships under US command.
And that’s only at sea – air power has also been deployed, with bombers flying over the Caribbean, and even along the Venezuelan coast, as recently as this week.
Image: A Boeing B-52H Stratofortress near Venezuelan coast from Minot Air Force Base, North Dakota, on 3 December. Credit: FlightRadar24
Sky’s Data & Forensics unit has verified that in the past four months since strikes began, 23 boats have been targeted in 22 strikes, killing 87 people.
Datawrapper
This content is provided by Datawrapper, which may be using cookies and other technologies.
To show you this content, we need your permission to use cookies.
You can use the buttons below to amend your preferences to enable Datawrapper cookies or to allow those cookies just once.
You can change your settings at any time via the Privacy Options.
Unfortunately we have been unable to verify if you have consented to Datawrapper cookies.
To view this content you can use the button below to allow Datawrapper cookies for this session only.
It was the first such strike since 15 November and since the defence secretary, sometimes referred to as secretary of war, Pete Hegseth, came under scrutiny for an alleged “second strike” in an earlier attack.
The US says it carried out the action because of drugs – and there has been some evidence to support its assertion.
The Dominican Republic said it had recovered the contents of one boat hit by a strike – a huge haul of cocaine.
Legal issues
Whatever the cargo, though, there are serious, disputed legal issues.
Firstly, it is contested whether by designating the people on the boats as narcoterrorists, it makes them lawful military targets – or whether the strikes are in fact extra judicial murders of civilians at sea.
And more specifically… well, let’s go back to that very first video, of the very first strike.
What this footage doesn’t show is what came afterwards – an alleged “second strike” that targeted people in the water posing no apparent threat.
And the 4 December strike shows this strategy isn’t over.
The strikes are just part of the story, as warships and planes have headed toward the region in huge numbers.
Drugs or oil?
Some have said this isn’t about drugs at all, but oil.
Venezuela has lots – the world’s largest proven reserves.
Speaking to the faithful on Fox News, Republican congresswoman – and Trump supporter – Maria Salazar said access to Venezuela would be a “field day” for American oil companies.
And Maduro himself has taken up that theme. A few days later, he wrote this letter to OPEC – which represents major oil producing nations – to “address the growing and illegal threats made by the government of the United States against Venezuela”.
That’s how Maduro has framed this – a plan by the US “to seize Venezuela’s vast oil reserves… through lethal military force”.
Lethal military force – an understatement when you think of the armada lying in wait.
And it may be called upon soon. Trump on Tuesday said he’s preparing to take these strikes from international waters on to Venezuelan territory.
Maduro has complained of 22 weeks of “aggression”. There may be many more to come.
Additional reporting by Sophia Massam, junior digital investigations journalist.
The Data X Forensics team is a multi-skilled unit dedicated to providing transparent journalism from Sky News. We gather, analyse and visualise data to tell data-driven stories. We combine traditional reporting skills with advanced analysis of satellite images, social media and other open source information. Through multimedia storytelling we aim to better explain the world while also showing how our journalism is done.
Donald Trump’s bruising assessment of Europe as “weak” and “decaying” is a bitter blow to nations already reeling from the release of his national security strategy.
At the end of the 45-minute interview with Politico, EU leaders might be forgiven for thinking, with friends like these, who needs enemies?
“Europe doesn’t know what to do,” Trump said, “They want to be politically correct, and it makes them weak.”
Image: Trump meets leaders from Ukraine, Germany, France, the UK, Italy, and Finland, as well as the EU and NATO, in August Pic: Reuters
On the contrary, I would imagine some choice words were being uttered in European capitals as they waded through the string of insults.
First up, the US president criticised European leaders for failing to end the war between Russia and Ukraine.
“They talk but they don’t produce. And the war just keeps going on and on,” he said.
The fact that the Russians have shown no real commitment to stopping the invasion they started is not mentioned.
More on Donald Trump
Related Topics:
Image: EU Flags at the European Commission Building. Pic: iStock
Instead, the blame is laid squarely at the feet of Ukraine and its allies in Europe.
“I think if I weren’t president, we would have had World War III,” Trump suggested, while concluding that Moscow is in the stronger position.
Critics claim that the White House has emboldened the Kremlin and brought Putin in from the cold with a summit and photo opportunities.
Trump highlights the fact that his return to office forced many European NATO members to increase defence spending drastically.
Image: Trump meeting European leaders in the Oval Office in August. Pic: @RapidResponse47
On this, he is correct – the growing insecurity around how long America can be relied on has brought security into sharp focus.
The release of the new US national security strategy has only added to the feelings of unease.
German Chancellor Friedrich Merz on Tuesday claimed some of its contents were unacceptable from a European point of view.
“I see no need for America to want to save democracy in Europe. If it was necessary to save it, we would manage it on our own,” he told a news conference in Rhineland-Palatinate, the German state where Trump’s paternal grandfather was born.
Image: Meeting between, left to right, Keir Starmer of the UK, Volodymyr Zelenskyy of Ukraine, Emmanuel Macron of France, Donald Tusk of Poland, and Friedrich Merz of Germany. Pic: AP
The leader of the EU’s biggest power also said that the new US strategy was not a surprise and largely chimed with the vice president’s speech at the Munich Security Conference in February.
For this reason, Merz reiterated that Europe and Germany must become more independent from America for their security policies.
However, he noted, “I say in my discussions with the Americans, ‘America first’ is fine, but America alone cannot be in your interests.”
For his part, while Trump said he liked most of Europe’s current leaders, he warned they were “destroying” their countries with their migration policies.
He said: “Europe is a different place, and if it keeps going the way it’s going, Europe will not be…in my opinion, many of those countries will not be viable countries any longer. Their immigration policy is a disaster”.
He added: “Most European nations… they’re decaying.”
Again, the comments echoed his security strategy, which warned immigration risked “civilisation erasure” in Europe.
There’s no doubt immigration is a major concern for many of the continent’s leaders and voters.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
8:11
Zelenskyy meets European leaders
However, irregular crossings into the EU fell 22% in the first 10 months of 2025 according to Frontex, a fact which seems to have passed the president and his team by.
“Within a few decades at the latest, certain Nato members will become majority non-European”, his security document warned.
It also suggested “cultivating resistance” in Europe “to restore former greatness” leading to speculation about how America might intervene in European politics.
Trump appeared to add further clarification on Tuesday, saying while he did not “want to run Europe”, he would consider “endorsing” his preferred candidates in future elections.
Spotify
This content is provided by Spotify, which may be using cookies and other technologies.
To show you this content, we need your permission to use cookies.
You can use the buttons below to amend your preferences to enable Spotify cookies or to allow those cookies just once.
You can change your settings at any time via the Privacy Options.
Unfortunately we have been unable to verify if you have consented to Spotify cookies.
To view this content you can use the button below to allow Spotify cookies for this session only.
This comment will also ruffle feathers on the continent where the European Council President has already warned Trump’s administration against interfering in Europe’s affairs.
“Allies do not threaten to interfere in the domestic political choices of their allies,” Antonio Costa said on Monday.
“The US cannot replace Europe in what its vision is of free expression… Europe must be sovereign.”
So, what will happen now, and how will Europe’s leaders respond?
If you are hoping for a showdown, you will likely be disappointed.
Like him or loathe him, Europe’s leaders need Trump.
They need the might of America and want to try to secure continued support for Ukraine.
While the next few days will be filled with politely scripted statements or rejections of the president’s comments, most of his allies know on this occasion they are probably best to grin and bear it.
Police officers found a handgun, a silencer and a red notebook described as a “manifesto” when they arrested Luigi Mangione.
The 27-year-old was arrested in December 2024 and charged with killing UnitedHealthcare chief executive Brian Thompson in New York City.
Mangione‘s lawyers want to block prosecutors from showing or telling jurors at his eventual trial in Manhattan about statements he allegedly made and items they said police seized from his backpack during his arrest at a McDonald’s in Pennsylvania.
The objects include a 9mm handgun prosecutors say matches the one used in the killing, a silencer, a magazine with bullets wrapped in underwear and a notebook in which they say Mangione described his intent to “wack” a healthcare executive.
Image: Mangione with his attorney. Pic: Reuters
The defence contends the items should be excluded because police did not get a warrant before searching Mangione’s backpack.
Prosecutors deny claims Mangione was illegally searched and questioned.
They also want to suppress some statements he made to police, such as allegedly giving a false name, because officers asked him questions before telling him he had a right to remain silent.
Last week, Mangione watched surveillance videos of the killing of Mr Thompson, 50, as he walked to a New York City hotel for his company’s annual investor conference.
Mangione has pleaded not guilty to state and federal murder charges.
The state charges carry the possibility of life in prison, while federal prosecutors are seeking the death penalty.
This week’s hearing concerns only the state case, but Mangione’s lawyers want to bar evidence from both cases.
In September, a judge dismissed two terrorism counts against Mangione, finding prosecutors had not presented enough evidence Mangione intended to intimidate health insurance workers or influence government policy.
Trial dates are yet to be set in either the state or federal cases.