While GAW is high as a kite over Gaetz's nomination, there is a consideration we need to think about:
While Gaetz is Trump's first pick, he's NOT Trump's final, or real, AG pick.
Gaetz's Trump's first low-ball offer to the seller when negotiating deals, something Trump has plenty of experience with. When making deals, you first throw out an extreme number that is the absolute minimum or maximum end that you are willing to go with, and the opposite side will do the same to you.
Then, the you and the opposite side will negotiate down to a medium that hopefully satisfies you and your main objectives.
Gaetz, while our ideal man for the job, might be considered to be too extreme to do the job effectively (and I don't think GAW nor Truth Social had him in the list of seriously-discussed AG candidates, so it clues us in the fact that his nomination is a complete surprise, and potentially not that serious.) I bet that Gaetz is there to make the final AG choice Trump has seem more tame in comparison.
Of course, Gaetz could be sworn in normally, which is still good for us..
And with regards to the talk about Article II Section 3, my problem with that possibility is that I don't think that route has been tested and proven to actually work without significant and real damage backlash that WILL harm the MAGA movement. Plus, it might give the enemy the green-light to use this tool against us if they succeeded in seizing power from us again. Also, the only source of this notion is "though a writer", which holds as much water as "anonymous sources" or "sources close to the Trump Administration", which is absolutely no water.
Sounds like a rumor to smear Trump again.
Recess appointments still need confirmation eventually. There is a deadline for that which may be far enough out for Gaetz to do the house cleaning and then someone else comes in later to do the rebuild.
The law on this is ugly. The person receiving the recess appointment can serve up to the end of the session of that CONgress (there are 2 sessions in each CONgress). However there are time requirements that I don't fully understand, some of which could mean the difference between a year and a 2 year appointment. Then there are rules if the appointee has actually been denied, and even a rule that allows the POTUS to put them back in on another recess appointment. There are also rules that can allow CONgress to deny their pay (so the appointee would have to serve for free).
I gave up on trying to figure the whole thing out. It was clear as mud. I just figure he can serve 1, or maybe up to 2 years on a recess appointment.