The stand-off started long before dawn. By the time we arrived in the dark, an army of police had pushed back suspended president Yoon Suk Yeol's angry supporters, who'd camped out overnight hoping to stop his arrest. Some of those I spoke to were crying, others wailing, at what they feared was about to unfold.

As dawn broke, the first officers ran up to the house, but were instantly thwarted - blocked by a wall of soldiers protecting the compound. Reinforcements came, but could not help. The doors to Yoon's house stayed tightly sealed, his security team refusing the police officers entry.

For several hours the investigators waited, the crowds outside growing more agitated - until, after a series of scuffles between the police and security officials, they decided their mission was futile, and gave up.

This is totally uncharted territory for South Korea. It is the first time a sitting president has ever faced arrest, so there is no rule book to follow - but the current situation is nonetheless astonishing.

When Yoon was impeached three weeks ago, he was supposedly stripped of his power. So to have law enforcement officers trying to carry out an arrest - which they have legal warrant for - only to be blocked by Yoon's security team raises serious and uncomfortable questions about who is in charge here.

The investigating officers said they abandoned efforts to arrest Yoon not only because it looked impossible, but because they were concerned for their safety. They said 200 soldiers and security officers linked arms, forming a human wall to block the entrance to the presidential residence, with some carrying guns.

This is arguably part of Yoon's plan, leveraging a system he himself designed. Before he declared martial law last month – a plan we now know he cooked up months earlier – he surrounded himself with close friends and loyalists, injecting them into positions of power.

One of those people is the current head of his security team, who took up the job in September.

But although alarming, this situation is not entirely surprising. Yoon has refused to cooperate with the authorities over this investigation, ignoring every request to come in for questioning.

This is how things reached this point, where investigators felt they had no choice but to bring him in by force. Yoon is being investigated for one of the most serious political crimes there is: inciting an insurrection, which is punishable by life in prison or death.

Yoon has also spurred on his supporters, who have gathered in force outside his residence every day since the arrest warrant was issued. He sent them a letter on New Years' Day thanking them for "working hard" to defend both him and the country.

Although most people in South Korea are upset and angry at Yoon's decision to impose martial law, a core of his supporters have stayed loyal. Some even camped overnight, in freezing temperatures, to try and stop police reaching his home.

Many told me this morning they were prepared to die to protect Yoon, and repeated the same unfounded conspiracy theories that Yoon himself has floated – that last year's election was rigged, and the country had been infiltrated by pro-North Korea forces. They held up signs reading "stop the steal", a slogan they chanted over and over.

Attention is also now on South Korea's acting President Choi Sang-mok, and how far his powers extend; whether he could and should sack the president's security chief and force the team to allow his arrest. The opposition party says police should be arresting anyone who stands in their way.

Although investigators have until 6 January to attempt this arrest again – this is when the warrant runs out - it is unlikely they will go in once more without changing their strategy or negotiating with the security team in advance. They will want to avoid a repeat of today's failure.

They also have to contend with the throngs of Yoon's supporters, who now feel victorious and empowered. They believe they are largely responsible for the authorities' climb down. "We've won, we did it," they have been singing all afternoon.

As their confidence grows, so will their numbers, especially with the weekend approaching.

US law enforcement is looking for clues to unravel the mystery behind the Tesla vehicle that exploded outside Trump International Hotel in Las Vegas earlier this week, giving seven people minor injuries.

The man who rented the Cybertruck - then drove it to the city and parked it in front of the hotel - has been identified as Matthew Alan Livelsberger, a 37-year-old active-duty US special forces soldier.

Police found his lifeless body inside the charred Tesla with a self-inflicted gunshot wound. They also found fuel cannisters and more than a dozen firework mortars in the bed of the vehicle.

On Thursday, there remained a heightened police presence at the hotel, located right off the busy Las Vegas strip. Yellow police tape cordoned off a small section of the hotel's entrance as employees worked to repair damage to the facade.

Authorities continue to work and piece together information, and many questions remain.

For example, it is unclear why Livelsberger rented the car - or if the perpetrator was intending to make a political statement ahead of Donald Trump's return to the White House later this month.

Why did Livelsberger drive to Las Vegas?

One of the biggest unanswered questions is why Livelsberger rented the Tesla and drove it more than 800 miles (1,300km) from Colorado to Las Vegas.

Las Vegas police said he rented the vehicle on 28 December in Denver. They were able to track his movements using photographs taken on the drive and information from Tesla's charging technology. He was the only one seen driving it, they said.

The vehicle arrived in the city on Wednesday morning, less than two hours before the explosion, police said.

Las Vegas Sheriff Kevin McMahill said on Thursday that a body inside the vehicle was recovered. It was burned beyond recognition, but the county's coroner used DNA and dental records to confirm that Livelsberger had been inside the Cybertruck at the time of the blast. He was found with a self-inflicted gunshot wound to the head.

"I'm comfortable calling it a suicide with a bombing that occurred immediately after," Sheriff McMahill said. He added that no motive for the incident had been established.

Was the explosion meant to be a political statement?

Another big question is whether the explosion was meant as a statement ahead of the change of US president later this month.

Police have not found any evidence that links the alleged perpetrator to specific political beliefs, but they said they were investigating whether the incident was tied to the fact that President-elect Donald Trump owns the hotel, or that Elon Musk runs Tesla.

Trump recently named Musk to co-lead a presidential advisory commission, the Department of Government Efficiency, after the two became close during Trump's campaign.

"It's not lost on us that it's in front of the Trump building, and that it's a Tesla vehicle," said Spencer Evans, an FBI agent based in Las Vegas, on Thursday.

"But we don't have information at this point that definitely tells us, or suggests, that (the incident) was because of a particular ideology," he said.

Was it related to the attack in New Orleans?

The explosion happened just a few hours after a man drove a pickup truck into New Year revellers on the crowded Bourbon Street in New Orleans, Louisiana, killing 14 people and injuring dozens of others.

That attacker has been identified as Shamsud-Din Jabbar, a 42-year-old US citizen who also served in the US Army.

President Joe Biden has said investigators are looking into whether the two incidents are linked, though so far nothing has been uncovered to suggest that is the case.

But the question continues to be fuelled by the apparent similarities between the two incidents and some biographical details of the drivers of both vehicles.

Both incidents happened in the early hours of New Year's Day. Both men served in the US armed forces - including at the Fort Liberty (formerly Fort Bragg) military base in North Carolina - and both completed a tour in Afghanistan. Both men also rented the vehicles they used through a mobile car rental application called Turo.

However, police have said there is no evidence the two men were in the same unit or served at the same time at Fort Liberty. Although both were deployed to Afghanistan in 2009, there is no evidence they served in the same province, location or unit.

In the New Orleans attack, police recovered an Islamic State (IS) group flag from the vehicle used by Jabbar. They added that he posted videos to social media moments prior claiming allegiance to the group. Police have determined that Jabbar was acting alone.

Meanwhile, in Las Vegas, there is no evidence that suggests that Livelsberger was motivated by IS, or that he and Jabbar had ever been in contact. Police have cautioned that the investigation remains active.

What is Livelsberger's background?

Livelsberger was a decorated special forces intelligence sergeant who was serving in Germany, but was on approved leave at the time of the incident.

His father told BBC's US partner CBS News that his son was in Colorado to see his wife and eight-month-old daughter.

He said he last spoke to his son at Christmas and that everything seemed normal.

The Daily Beast reported that Livelsberger was a "big" supporter of Trump. A senior law enforcement official who spoke with Livelsberger's family told the outlet that Livelsberger voted for Trump in November's election.

His uncle told The Independent that Livelsberger loved Trump "and he was always a very, very patriotic soldier, a patriotic American."

Israel has confirmed it is holding Gaza hospital director Dr Hussam Abu Safiya after earlier telling a local NGO that it was unaware of his case, sparking concern for his well being.

The Israel Defense Forces (IDF) statement said he was "currently being investigated by Israeli security forces" in person.

The statement did not offer an explanation for the confusion but repeated that he was suspected of being a "terrorist" and for "holding a rank" in Hamas, the armed Palestinian group at war with Israel in Gaza.

Dr Abu Safiya was arrested as the Israeli military forced patients and medical staff to leave Kamal Adwan hospital in northern Gaza last Friday, alleging the facility was a "Hamas terrorist stronghold".

On Thursday the IDF told Physicians for Human Rights Israel (PHRI) that it had "no indication of the arrest or detention of the individual in question".

The PHRI filed a petition with the Israeli High Court of Justice on Thursday, demanding Dr Abu Safiya's location be disclosed. It said the court had given the IDF a week to comply.

Meanwhile Amnesty head Agnès Callamard said Israeli authorities must "urgently disclose his whereabouts".

She said Israel had detained "hundreds of Palestinian healthcare workers from Gaza without charge or trial" and said they had been "subjected to torture and other ill-treatment and been held in incommunicado detention".

Israel denies mistreating detainees.

Dr Abu Safiya's family previously told BBC Arabic they believe he is being held at Sde Teiman military base in southern Israel, where Israeli forces have taken many detainees from Gaza for interrogation.

Whistleblowers have previously told the BBC and other international media of extremely harsh conditions for detainees there. Israel has said all detainees there are kept "carefully and appropriately".

The IDF ordered everyone inside Kamal Adwan hospital to leave last Friday morning, giving the hospital about 15 minutes to move patients and staff into the courtyard, medical staff told the BBC.

Beit Lahia, where the hospital is located, has been under a tightening Israeli blockade imposed on parts of northern Gaza since October. The UN has said the area has been under "near-total siege" as the Israeli military heavily restricts access of aid deliveries to an area where an estimated 10,000 to 15,000 people remain.

On Saturday, the IDF said it apprehended 240 combatants at Kamal Adwan and said Dr Abu Safiya was among medical staff taken for questioning.

Video footage showed him walking towards an Israeli armoured vehicle before being taken for interrogation. An Israeli military spokesperson confirmed the arrest that same day, saying the doctor had been transferred for questioning.

Dr Abu Safiya was previously arrested by Israeli forces during an earlier raid on the hospital in October, but was freed shortly afterwards. During that Israeli operation Dr Abu Safiya's 15-year-old son was killed in a drone strike. Footage from later that day showed him leading funeral prayers for his son in the hospital courtyard.

Israeli attacks on Gaza's healthcare facilities have prompted increasing condemnation.

On Tuesday the UN Human Rights Office says Israeli attacks on and around hospitals have pushed Gaza's healthcare system to "the brink of total collapse" and raised serious concerns about war crimes and crimes against humanity.

Israel's mission in Geneva said Israeli forces operated in accordance with international law and would "never target innocent civilians".

Israel launched a campaign to destroy Hamas in response to the group's unprecedented attack on southern Israel on 7 October 2023, in which about 1,200 people were killed and 251 others were taken hostage.

More than 45,580 people have been killed in Gaza since then, according to the territory's health ministry.

US President Joe Biden has formally blocked the takeover of US Steel by a bigger Japanese company, saying foreign ownership could pose risks for national security.

The controversial decision comes a year after Nippon Steel first announced the $14.9bn (£12bn) deal, describing it as a lifeline for its smaller Pennsylvania-based rival.

But the transaction soon ran into political trouble, after leaders of the United Steelworkers union loudly opposed the deal, bringing political pressure to bear in a key state during the 2024 presidential election.

Biden decided to scrap the deal despite concerns by some advisors that it could damage Washington's relations with Tokyo, a key ally.

BBC News has contacted Nippon Steel and US Steel for comment.

Nippon Steel has previously denied that it planned to reduce production or cut jobs, while US Steel had warned that it might have to close plants without the investment that would come with a new owner.

Those concerns had been echoed by some workers and local politicians.

Other business groups said they feared rejecting the transaction would chill the climate for international investment in the US.

But Biden has voiced longstanding opposition to the deal. The transaction has also been criticised by President-elect Donald Trump and the incoming vice-president, JD Vance.

A US government panel charged with reviewing the deal for national security risks failed to reach a consensus by late December, leaving the decision to Biden, who was required to act within a 15-day deadline.

In his announcement on Friday he said maintaining US ownership was important to keeping the US steel industry and it supply chains strong.

"As I have said many times, steel production - and the steel workers who produce it - are the backbone of our nation," he said.

"That is because steel powers our country: our infrastructure, our auto industry, and our defense industrial base. Without domestic steel production and domestic steel workers, our nation is less strong and less secure."

Nippon Steel and US Steel have previously suggested they may pursue legal action against the government if the deal did not happen.

Prof Stephen Nagy, of the Department of Politics International Studies at the International Christian University in Tokyo, said this was a "political" decision, noting that the Biden administration from its start promised a "foreign policy for the middle class".

"This was a direct response and continuation of the Trump MAGA agenda of Making America Great Again," he said.

"The Biden administration couldn't appear weak on foreign businesses, whether it's an ally or adversary."

There were more than 100 police officers and they were armed with a warrant - but South Korean authorities failed to arrest suspended President Yoon Suk Yeol after a six-hour deadlock outside his home.

That's how long the confrontation with Yoon's security team lasted as they formed a human wall and used vehicles to block the arrest team's path, according to local media.

It has been an unprecedented month for South Korean politics - Yoon's shocking yet short-lived martial law order was followed by an impeachment vote against him. Then came the criminal investigation, his refusal to appear for questioning and, earlier this week, a warrant for his arrest.

The right-wing leader still has a strong support base - and thousands of them turned up outside his home on Friday morning to oppose his arrest.

But, by many accounts, Yoon is now a disgraced leader - impeached by parliament and suspended from office, he awaits the decision of the constitutional court which can remove him from office.

So why has it proven so difficult for police to arrest him?

The men guarding the president

Although Yoon has been stripped of his presidential powers - after lawmakers voted to impeach him - he is still entitled to a security detail.

And those men played a key role in blocking the arrest on Friday.

The presidential security service (PSS) could have acted out of loyalty to Yoon or under "a misguided understanding of their legal and constitutional role", says Mason Richey, an associate professor at Seoul's Hankuk University of Foreign Studies.

Given that Yoon has been suspended, the PSS should be taking directions from acting President Choi Sang-mok. "They have either not been instructed by acting President Choi to stand down, or they are refusing his orders to do so," says Assoc Prof Richey.

Some experts believe the security officers were showing "unconditional loyalty" to Yoon, rather than the office itself. They point to the fact that the PSS's chief Park Jong-joon was appointed to the job by Yoon last September.

"It may well be the case that Yoon has seeded the organisation with hardline loyalists in preparation for precisely this eventuality," says US-based lawyer and Korea expert Christopher Jumin Lee.

And that Park's predecessor was former defence minister Kim Yong-hyun, who is accused of advising Yoon to impose martial law. He is currently being held for questioning as part of the criminal investigation into Yoon.

A risk of escalation

The "simplest" solution, Mr Lee says, is for acting president Choi to order the PSS to stand down in the interim.

"If he is unwilling to do so, that may be grounds for his own impeachment by the National Assembly," he added.

Choi, who is the finance minister, had stepped in to lead the country after lawmakers voted to impeach Yoon's first successor, Prime Minister Han Duck-soo.

This political stalemate also reflects the polarisation in South Korean politics - between those who support Yoon, and his decison to impose martial law, and those who oppose it. And the differences don't necessarily end there.

The vast majority of South Koreans agree that Yoon's declaration of martial law on 3 Dec was wrong and that he needs to be held accountable, says Duyeon Kim, an adjunct senior fellow at the Center for a New American Security - but they cannot agree on what accountability looks like.

"The actors involved disagree over process, procedure and their legal basis, which is adding to the current political uncertainty," she explains.

That uncertainty is also creating tense stand-offs like the one that unfolded on Friday in and outside Yoon's presidental residence, where his supporters have been camping out for days, leading to heated speeches and even skirmishes with police.

Law enforcement could return with more agents and use force but that would be "highly dangerous," Assoc Prof Mason said.

The PSS too is heavily armed, so arresting officers would be looking to avoid any escalation.

"What happens if the police show up with additional warrants calling for the arrest of PSS personnel, [the PSS] defy those warrants as well and then brandish their guns?" Mr Lee asks.

Police have now said they are investigating the PSS director and his deputy for obstructing them - so there could be more charges and arrest warrants coming.

The fallout from Yoon's martial law order is also a challenge for the Corruption Investigation Office (CIO) that is investigating him.

It has only been operating for four years. It was was created in response to public anger over former president Park Geun-hye who was impeached, removed from office and later jailed over a corruption scandal.

While South Korean presidents have been jailed before, Yoon is the first one to face arrest before he steps down.

Investigators have until 6 January to arrest Yoon before the current warrant expires.

They may attempt to arrest Yoon again over the weekend, although the weekend could pose a bigger challenge if the crowds of supporters grow. They can also apply for a new warrant and try to detain him again.

Given how far South Korea has now slid into uncharted territory, the uncertainty is likely to continue.

Additional reporting by Ewe Koh

A seven-month-old baby has died after a crash on the A1 as officers investigate whether the incident was linked to icy conditions.

Lincolnshire Police were called to the southbound carriageway near the A52 junction at Grantham at 22:50 GMT on Thursday, after a yellow Honda Jazz left the road and crashed into a tree.

The baby boy suffered serious injuries and was taken to hospital but died just after 05:00 on Friday. A woman travelling in the car also suffered serious injuries.

The southbound carriageway remains closed while investigations take place.

Lincolnshire Police said two other people were in the vehicle and were not seriously hurt.

The force said it was keeping an "open mind" over the cause of the collision but said it could be linked to icy conditions in the area.

The family of the boy is being supported by specially-trained officers.

Alicia Kearns, the Conservative MP for Rutland and Stamford, said the incident was "heart-breaking" and said her "heart goes out to the family and loved ones at this impossible time".

Lincolnshire Police said it was keen to speak to anyone who may have been driving in the area at the time of the incident or over the past few days.

Listen to highlights from Lincolnshire on BBC Sounds, watch the latest episode of Look North or tell us about a story you think we should be covering here.

The stand-off started long before dawn. By the time we arrived in the dark, an army of police had pushed back suspended president Yoon Suk Yeol's angry supporters, who'd camped out overnight hoping to stop his arrest. Some of those I spoke to were crying, others wailing, at what they feared was about to unfold.

As dawn broke, the first officers ran up to the house, but were instantly thwarted - blocked by a wall of soldiers protecting the compound. Reinforcements came, but could not help. The doors to Yoon's house stayed tightly sealed, his security team refusing the police officers entry.

For several hours the investigators waited, the crowds outside growing more agitated - until, after a series of scuffles between the police and security officials, they decided their mission was futile, and gave up.

This is totally uncharted territory for South Korea. It is the first time a sitting president has ever faced arrest, so there is no rule book to follow - but the current situation is nonetheless astonishing.

When Yoon was impeached three weeks ago, he was supposedly stripped of his power. So to have law enforcement officers trying to carry out an arrest - which they have legal warrant for - only to be blocked by Yoon's security team raises serious and uncomfortable questions about who is in charge here.

The investigating officers said they abandoned efforts to arrest Yoon not only because it looked impossible, but because they were concerned for their safety. They said 200 soldiers and security officers linked arms, forming a human wall to block the entrance to the presidential residence, with some carrying guns.

This is arguably part of Yoon's plan, leveraging a system he himself designed. Before he declared martial law last month – a plan we now know he cooked up months earlier – he surrounded himself with close friends and loyalists, injecting them into positions of power.

One of those people is the current head of his security team, who took up the job in September.

But although alarming, this situation is not entirely surprising. Yoon has refused to cooperate with the authorities over this investigation, ignoring every request to come in for questioning.

This is how things reached this point, where investigators felt they had no choice but to bring him in by force. Yoon is being investigated for one of the most serious political crimes there is: inciting an insurrection, which is punishable by life in prison or death.

Yoon has also spurred on his supporters, who have gathered in force outside his residence every day since the arrest warrant was issued. He sent them a letter on New Years' Day thanking them for "working hard" to defend both him and the country.

Although most people in South Korea are upset and angry at Yoon's decision to impose martial law, a core of his supporters have stayed loyal. Some even camped overnight, in freezing temperatures, to try and stop police reaching his home.

Many told me this morning they were prepared to die to protect Yoon, and repeated the same unfounded conspiracy theories that Yoon himself has floated – that last year's election was rigged, and the country had been infiltrated by pro-North Korea forces. They held up signs reading "stop the steal", a slogan they chanted over and over.

Attention is also now on South Korea's acting President Choi Sang-mok, and how far his powers extend; whether he could and should sack the president's security chief and force the team to allow his arrest. The opposition party says police should be arresting anyone who stands in their way.

Although investigators have until 6 January to attempt this arrest again – this is when the warrant runs out - it is unlikely they will go in once more without changing their strategy or negotiating with the security team in advance. They will want to avoid a repeat of today's failure.

They also have to contend with the throngs of Yoon's supporters, who now feel victorious and empowered. They believe they are largely responsible for the authorities' climb down. "We've won, we did it," they have been singing all afternoon.

As their confidence grows, so will their numbers, especially with the weekend approaching.

Elon Musk's attack on the government's handling of grooming gangs is "misjudged and certainly misinformed", Health Secretary Wes Streeting has said.

Tech multi-billionaire Musk has posted a series of messages on his social media site X, accusing Sir Keir Starmer of failing to prosecute gangs that systematically groomed and raped young girls, and calling for Safeguarding minister Jess Phillips to be jailed.

Asked about his comments, Streeting said "this government takes the issue of child sexual exploitation incredibly seriously".

He invited Musk to "roll up his sleeves and work with us" against rape gangs.

The Tories have also criticised Musk for "sharing things that are factually inaccurate".

While visiting a care home in Carlisle on Friday, Streeting said Labour was getting "on with the job" of implementing the recommendations of the independent inquiry into child sexual abuse led by Professor Alexis Jay "in full".

He told reporters: "Some of the criticisms Elon Musk has made I think are misjudged and certainly misinformed.

"But we're willing to work with Elon Musk who I think has got a big role to play with his social media platform to help us and other countries tackle these serious issues.

"If he wants to work with us and roll his sleeves up, we'd welcome that."

Musk, a key adviser to US President-elect Donald Trump, has accused Sir Keir of failing to properly prosecute rape gangs while director of public prosecutions (DPP), and repeatedly retweeted Reform UK and Conservative MPs calling for a national inquiry.

He also suggested safeguarding minister Jess Phillips "deserves to be in prison" after she rejected a request for the Home Office to order a public inquiry into child sexual exploitation in Oldham. She said the council should commission a local inquiry instead.

The decision was criticised by several senior Tories, despite the previous Conservative government turning down a similar request in 2022.

Tory leader Kemi Badenoch has called for a full national public inquiry into what she called the UK's "rape gangs scandal".

But the party has also criticised Musk for "sharing things that are factually inaccurate" and distanced itself from his call for Phillips to be jailed.

Alicia Kearns – who shadows Phillips as the Conservative spokesperson on safeguarding – told BBC Radio 5 Live Musk had "fallen prone" to sharing things on his X platform "without critically assessing them".

She accused Musk of "drawing away attention from the survivors and from the victims" of rape gangs, and "lionising people like [far-right activist] Tommy Robinson - which is frankly dangerous".

Jay inquiry

There have been numerous investigations into the systematic rape of girls and young women by organised gangs, including in Rotherham, Cornwall, Derbyshire, Rochdale and Bristol.

Earlier on Friday, health minister Andrew Gwynne suggested Musk "ought to focus" on US politics, where he is set to act as an unelected adviser to the Trump administration on cutting federal spending.

Speaking to LBC Radio, Gwynne added that child grooming was a "very serious issue", pointing to previous investigations which had taken place into sexual abuse scandals.

"There comes a point where we don't need more inquiries, and had Elon Musk really paid attention to what's been going on in this country, he might have recognised that there have already been inquiries," he said.

The Independent Inquiry into Child Sex Abuse (IICSA), which published its final report in 2022, described the sexual abuse of children as an "epidemic that leaves tens of thousands of victims in its poisonous wake".

It knitted several previous inquiries together alongside its own investigations.

Professor Jay said in November she felt "frustrated" that none of her report's 20 recommendations to tackle abuse had been implemented more than two years later.

She said: "It's a difficult subject matter, but it is essential that there's some public understanding of it.

"But we can only do what we can to press the government to look at the delivery of all of this.

"It doesn't need more consultation, it does not need more research or discussion, it just needs to be done."

Neil Young has announced he will play this year's Glastonbury Festival, just days after saying he had turned down a slot because of the BBC's involvement.

The 79-year-old had announced that he and his band would not play the event because the BBC "wanted us to do a lot of things in a way we were not interested in".

But in a new post on his website, the rock legend wrote: "Due to an error in the information received, I had decided to not play the Glastonbury Festival, which I always have loved.

"Happily, the festival is now back on our itinerary and we look forward to playing. Hope to see you there!"

Glastonbury organiser Emily Eavis welcomed the decision.

"What a start to the year!" she wrote on Instagram.

"Neil Young is an artist who's very close to our hearts at Glastonbury. He does things his own way and that's why we love him.

"We can't wait to welcome him back here to headline the Pyramid in June."

It is not known whether the change of heart means Young's 2025 Glastonbury set will be televised.

The BBC has been Glastonbury's exclusive broadcast partner since 1997, and broadcasts more than 50 hours of coverage every year.

However, the last time Young played the festival in 2009, he only allowed the BBC to show a short portion of his two-hour headline set.

The corporation said at the time it had spent a "couple of months" negotiating with Young's management over televising the performance.

In the end, his team only agreed to let five songs be broadcast, a decision that was made as Young was playing on the Pyramid Stage.

"They believe in the live event and retaining its mystery and that of their artist," explained Mark Cooper, the then-executive producer of the BBC's Glastonbury coverage.

"You probably won't find too many Neil Young performances available freely on TV or online," he added. "He generally prefers the audience to find his albums."

In his initial post on Tuesday, the star lashed out at what he described as the BBC's "corporate control" of Glastonbury, and said the festival "is not the way I remember it being".

Artists are not forced to hand over broadcast rights when they play the event, and often contracts are signed at the last minute.

BBC News has contacted Glastonbury and BBC Music for clarification.

A British woman and her fiance have been found dead in a holiday villa in Vietnam, local police have said.

Greta Marie Otteson, 33, was discovered by staff dead on a bed in a first-floor room in Hoi An, a coastal city in the central region of the East Asian nation, at around 11:18 local time (04:18 GMT) on 26 December, police said in a statement on Monday.

Her fiance Els Arno Quinton, a 36-year-old South African man, was found dead on a bed in another room in the villa that had reportedly been locked from the inside.

The UK Foreign Office confirmed it was in contact with local authorities and supporting the family of a British woman who had died in Vietnam.

Ms Otteson was a social media manager, and Mr Quinton was a musician and livestreamer.

A video announcing their engagement was posted on Instagram by videography company Red Eye Studios on 11 December.

Both had registered for long-term temporary residence at the Hoa Chuong villa, in the Cam Thanh commune, since last summer.

Police said a preliminary inspection of the bodies had found no signs of external force and that the rooms showed no sign of burglary.

Local media reports that several empty bottles of wine were found at the scene.

An investigation into the cause of the pair's deaths is ongoing.

A spokesperson for the UK Foreign Office said in a statement: "We are supporting the family of a British woman who has died in Vietnam and are in contact with the local authorities."

US President Joe Biden has formally blocked the takeover of US Steel by a bigger Japanese company, saying foreign ownership could pose risks for national security.

The controversial decision comes a year after Nippon Steel first announced the $14.9bn (£12bn) deal, describing it as a lifeline for its smaller Pennsylvania-based rival.

But the transaction soon ran into political trouble, after leaders of the United Steelworkers union loudly opposed the deal, bringing political pressure to bear in a key state during the 2024 presidential election.

Biden decided to scrap the deal despite concerns by some advisors that it could damage Washington's relations with Tokyo, a key ally.

BBC News has contacted Nippon Steel and US Steel for comment.

Nippon Steel has previously denied that it planned to reduce production or cut jobs, while US Steel had warned that it might have to close plants without the investment that would come with a new owner.

Those concerns had been echoed by some workers and local politicians.

Other business groups said they feared rejecting the transaction would chill the climate for international investment in the US.

But Biden has voiced longstanding opposition to the deal. The transaction has also been criticised by President-elect Donald Trump and the incoming vice-president, JD Vance.

A US government panel charged with reviewing the deal for national security risks failed to reach a consensus by late December, leaving the decision to Biden, who was required to act within a 15-day deadline.

In his announcement on Friday he said maintaining US ownership was important to keeping the US steel industry and it supply chains strong.

"As I have said many times, steel production - and the steel workers who produce it - are the backbone of our nation," he said.

"That is because steel powers our country: our infrastructure, our auto industry, and our defense industrial base. Without domestic steel production and domestic steel workers, our nation is less strong and less secure."

Nippon Steel and US Steel have previously suggested they may pursue legal action against the government if the deal did not happen.

Prof Stephen Nagy, of the Department of Politics International Studies at the International Christian University in Tokyo, said this was a "political" decision, noting that the Biden administration from its start promised a "foreign policy for the middle class".

"This was a direct response and continuation of the Trump MAGA agenda of Making America Great Again," he said.

"The Biden administration couldn't appear weak on foreign businesses, whether it's an ally or adversary."

Israel has confirmed it is holding Gaza hospital director Dr Hussam Abu Safiya after earlier telling a local NGO that it was unaware of his case, sparking concern for his well being.

The Israel Defense Forces (IDF) statement said he was "currently being investigated by Israeli security forces" in person.

The statement did not offer an explanation for the confusion but repeated that he was suspected of being a "terrorist" and for "holding a rank" in Hamas, the armed Palestinian group at war with Israel in Gaza.

Dr Abu Safiya was arrested as the Israeli military forced patients and medical staff to leave Kamal Adwan hospital in northern Gaza last Friday, alleging the facility was a "Hamas terrorist stronghold".

On Thursday the IDF told Physicians for Human Rights Israel (PHRI) that it had "no indication of the arrest or detention of the individual in question".

The PHRI filed a petition with the Israeli High Court of Justice on Thursday, demanding Dr Abu Safiya's location be disclosed. It said the court had given the IDF a week to comply.

Meanwhile Amnesty head Agnès Callamard said Israeli authorities must "urgently disclose his whereabouts".

She said Israel had detained "hundreds of Palestinian healthcare workers from Gaza without charge or trial" and said they had been "subjected to torture and other ill-treatment and been held in incommunicado detention".

Israel denies mistreating detainees.

Dr Abu Safiya's family previously told BBC Arabic they believe he is being held at Sde Teiman military base in southern Israel, where Israeli forces have taken many detainees from Gaza for interrogation.

Whistleblowers have previously told the BBC and other international media of extremely harsh conditions for detainees there. Israel has said all detainees there are kept "carefully and appropriately".

The IDF ordered everyone inside Kamal Adwan hospital to leave last Friday morning, giving the hospital about 15 minutes to move patients and staff into the courtyard, medical staff told the BBC.

Beit Lahia, where the hospital is located, has been under a tightening Israeli blockade imposed on parts of northern Gaza since October. The UN has said the area has been under "near-total siege" as the Israeli military heavily restricts access of aid deliveries to an area where an estimated 10,000 to 15,000 people remain.

On Saturday, the IDF said it apprehended 240 combatants at Kamal Adwan and said Dr Abu Safiya was among medical staff taken for questioning.

Video footage showed him walking towards an Israeli armoured vehicle before being taken for interrogation. An Israeli military spokesperson confirmed the arrest that same day, saying the doctor had been transferred for questioning.

Dr Abu Safiya was previously arrested by Israeli forces during an earlier raid on the hospital in October, but was freed shortly afterwards. During that Israeli operation Dr Abu Safiya's 15-year-old son was killed in a drone strike. Footage from later that day showed him leading funeral prayers for his son in the hospital courtyard.

Israeli attacks on Gaza's healthcare facilities have prompted increasing condemnation.

On Tuesday the UN Human Rights Office says Israeli attacks on and around hospitals have pushed Gaza's healthcare system to "the brink of total collapse" and raised serious concerns about war crimes and crimes against humanity.

Israel's mission in Geneva said Israeli forces operated in accordance with international law and would "never target innocent civilians".

Israel launched a campaign to destroy Hamas in response to the group's unprecedented attack on southern Israel on 7 October 2023, in which about 1,200 people were killed and 251 others were taken hostage.

More than 45,580 people have been killed in Gaza since then, according to the territory's health ministry.

The number of people going to shops has fallen for the second year in a row, according to a leading data monitor, after the year ended on a "drab December" for retail.

Footfall dropped 2.2% in 2024, having also fallen in 2023, the British Retail Consortium's (BRC) analysis of Sensormatic's data found.

Experts said a combination of cost of living pressures, the rise of online shopping, low consumer confidence and bad weather were to blame.

Tom Rowley, owner of Backstory Bookshop in south London, said he has been trying to beat the slump by offering shoppers a drink as part of their shopping "experience".

"People come here, pick up a whole pile of books, but then once they've done their Christmas shopping, we can reward them with a large glass of wine," he told the BBC.

"Sadly, you don't get that through online shopping."

Tom is not the only shop owner who is having to get creative to encourage customers.

Leanne Fridd, owner of Bookbugs and Dragon Tales in Norwich, told BBC Radio 5Live's Wake Up to Money that her bookshop has tried "a Santa's grotto, and authors, and all sorts of other things to try and entice people in".

However, despite her best efforts, she said "overall spend was down this year" even though footfall was "on par" with last year.

"We are really feeling it on the bottom line," she added.

'Dino day' to draw in shoppers

For Jenny Fazackerley, owner of Jenny Stitches in Barrow, drawing shoppers in with events is something that happens all year around.

She and the other local firms in the town's business improvement district (BID) have pooled money to put on events "at every school holiday and at every major event" in an effort to improve footfall.

The BID has hosted a soapbox derby, an autumn festival, and a "dino day", where actors dress up as dinosaurs and walk around the town to entertain children.

The town was also the final destination of a bike ride in honour of Hairy Biker and local Dave Myers, who died in February last year.

The event attracted thousands of people to Barrow and a second 'Dave Day' bike ride is planned again for this year

Jenny said footfall has been good in 2024 as a result of all these events, but describes it as an "ongoing challenge" for the area.

'A disappointing year'

While some shops and towns have fared better than others, the national picture is less rosy.

The figures for the final three months of 2024, which is usually the time of year when shoppers spend most, were also down on the same period last year by 2.5%.

"A drab December which saw fewer shoppers in all locations, capped a disappointing year for UK retail footfall," said BRC chief executive Helen Dickinson.

The BRC has urged the government to reduce business rates, a tax on commercial buildings, to help retailers invest.

Retail experts pinned the drop on a combination of cost of living pressures, the continued rise of online shopping, and low consumer confidence.

Next week, big retailers will reveal how they have fared over the Christmas period, with Tesco, Sainsbury's, Marks & Spencer, and Next all due to report after Lidl posted its results on Thursday.

"People are just being a lot more cautious about their spending," said Catherine Shuttleworth, chief executive of Savvy Marketing.

She pinned the lack of consumer confidence on the government for "talking down the economy". She also criticised its tax decisions, such as the employer national insurance contribution rise.

A Treasury spokesperson told the BBC "a thriving retail sector plays a crucial role in growing the economy and features at the heart of our communities", adding it had introduced a 40% business rates relief next year and will cut rates "permanently" from 2026.

Russ Mould, investment director at AJ Bell, said things could improve for the retail sector in the year ahead if inflation and interest rates fall while the economy improves.

"You can construct a more optimistic narrative for 2025," he said.

US law enforcement is looking for clues to unravel the mystery behind the Tesla vehicle that exploded outside Trump International Hotel in Las Vegas earlier this week, giving seven people minor injuries.

The man who rented the Cybertruck - then drove it to the city and parked it in front of the hotel - has been identified as Matthew Alan Livelsberger, a 37-year-old active-duty US special forces soldier.

Police found his lifeless body inside the charred Tesla with a self-inflicted gunshot wound. They also found fuel cannisters and more than a dozen firework mortars in the bed of the vehicle.

On Thursday, there remained a heightened police presence at the hotel, located right off the busy Las Vegas strip. Yellow police tape cordoned off a small section of the hotel's entrance as employees worked to repair damage to the facade.

Authorities continue to work and piece together information, and many questions remain.

For example, it is unclear why Livelsberger rented the car - or if the perpetrator was intending to make a political statement ahead of Donald Trump's return to the White House later this month.

Why did Livelsberger drive to Las Vegas?

One of the biggest unanswered questions is why Livelsberger rented the Tesla and drove it more than 800 miles (1,300km) from Colorado to Las Vegas.

Las Vegas police said he rented the vehicle on 28 December in Denver. They were able to track his movements using photographs taken on the drive and information from Tesla's charging technology. He was the only one seen driving it, they said.

The vehicle arrived in the city on Wednesday morning, less than two hours before the explosion, police said.

Las Vegas Sheriff Kevin McMahill said on Thursday that a body inside the vehicle was recovered. It was burned beyond recognition, but the county's coroner used DNA and dental records to confirm that Livelsberger had been inside the Cybertruck at the time of the blast. He was found with a self-inflicted gunshot wound to the head.

"I'm comfortable calling it a suicide with a bombing that occurred immediately after," Sheriff McMahill said. He added that no motive for the incident had been established.

Was the explosion meant to be a political statement?

Another big question is whether the explosion was meant as a statement ahead of the change of US president later this month.

Police have not found any evidence that links the alleged perpetrator to specific political beliefs, but they said they were investigating whether the incident was tied to the fact that President-elect Donald Trump owns the hotel, or that Elon Musk runs Tesla.

Trump recently named Musk to co-lead a presidential advisory commission, the Department of Government Efficiency, after the two became close during Trump's campaign.

"It's not lost on us that it's in front of the Trump building, and that it's a Tesla vehicle," said Spencer Evans, an FBI agent based in Las Vegas, on Thursday.

"But we don't have information at this point that definitely tells us, or suggests, that (the incident) was because of a particular ideology," he said.

Was it related to the attack in New Orleans?

The explosion happened just a few hours after a man drove a pickup truck into New Year revellers on the crowded Bourbon Street in New Orleans, Louisiana, killing 14 people and injuring dozens of others.

That attacker has been identified as Shamsud-Din Jabbar, a 42-year-old US citizen who also served in the US Army.

President Joe Biden has said investigators are looking into whether the two incidents are linked, though so far nothing has been uncovered to suggest that is the case.

But the question continues to be fuelled by the apparent similarities between the two incidents and some biographical details of the drivers of both vehicles.

Both incidents happened in the early hours of New Year's Day. Both men served in the US armed forces - including at the Fort Liberty (formerly Fort Bragg) military base in North Carolina - and both completed a tour in Afghanistan. Both men also rented the vehicles they used through a mobile car rental application called Turo.

However, police have said there is no evidence the two men were in the same unit or served at the same time at Fort Liberty. Although both were deployed to Afghanistan in 2009, there is no evidence they served in the same province, location or unit.

In the New Orleans attack, police recovered an Islamic State (IS) group flag from the vehicle used by Jabbar. They added that he posted videos to social media moments prior claiming allegiance to the group. Police have determined that Jabbar was acting alone.

Meanwhile, in Las Vegas, there is no evidence that suggests that Livelsberger was motivated by IS, or that he and Jabbar had ever been in contact. Police have cautioned that the investigation remains active.

What is Livelsberger's background?

Livelsberger was a decorated special forces intelligence sergeant who was serving in Germany, but was on approved leave at the time of the incident.

His father told BBC's US partner CBS News that his son was in Colorado to see his wife and eight-month-old daughter.

He said he last spoke to his son at Christmas and that everything seemed normal.

The Daily Beast reported that Livelsberger was a "big" supporter of Trump. A senior law enforcement official who spoke with Livelsberger's family told the outlet that Livelsberger voted for Trump in November's election.

His uncle told The Independent that Livelsberger loved Trump "and he was always a very, very patriotic soldier, a patriotic American."

The stand-off started long before dawn. By the time we arrived in the dark, an army of police had pushed back suspended president Yoon Suk Yeol's angry supporters, who'd camped out overnight hoping to stop his arrest. Some of those I spoke to were crying, others wailing, at what they feared was about to unfold.

As dawn broke, the first officers ran up to the house, but were instantly thwarted - blocked by a wall of soldiers protecting the compound. Reinforcements came, but could not help. The doors to Yoon's house stayed tightly sealed, his security team refusing the police officers entry.

For several hours the investigators waited, the crowds outside growing more agitated - until, after a series of scuffles between the police and security officials, they decided their mission was futile, and gave up.

This is totally uncharted territory for South Korea. It is the first time a sitting president has ever faced arrest, so there is no rule book to follow - but the current situation is nonetheless astonishing.

When Yoon was impeached three weeks ago, he was supposedly stripped of his power. So to have law enforcement officers trying to carry out an arrest - which they have legal warrant for - only to be blocked by Yoon's security team raises serious and uncomfortable questions about who is in charge here.

The investigating officers said they abandoned efforts to arrest Yoon not only because it looked impossible, but because they were concerned for their safety. They said 200 soldiers and security officers linked arms, forming a human wall to block the entrance to the presidential residence, with some carrying guns.

This is arguably part of Yoon's plan, leveraging a system he himself designed. Before he declared martial law last month – a plan we now know he cooked up months earlier – he surrounded himself with close friends and loyalists, injecting them into positions of power.

One of those people is the current head of his security team, who took up the job in September.

But although alarming, this situation is not entirely surprising. Yoon has refused to cooperate with the authorities over this investigation, ignoring every request to come in for questioning.

This is how things reached this point, where investigators felt they had no choice but to bring him in by force. Yoon is being investigated for one of the most serious political crimes there is: inciting an insurrection, which is punishable by life in prison or death.

Yoon has also spurred on his supporters, who have gathered in force outside his residence every day since the arrest warrant was issued. He sent them a letter on New Years' Day thanking them for "working hard" to defend both him and the country.

Although most people in South Korea are upset and angry at Yoon's decision to impose martial law, a core of his supporters have stayed loyal. Some even camped overnight, in freezing temperatures, to try and stop police reaching his home.

Many told me this morning they were prepared to die to protect Yoon, and repeated the same unfounded conspiracy theories that Yoon himself has floated – that last year's election was rigged, and the country had been infiltrated by pro-North Korea forces. They held up signs reading "stop the steal", a slogan they chanted over and over.

Attention is also now on South Korea's acting President Choi Sang-mok, and how far his powers extend; whether he could and should sack the president's security chief and force the team to allow his arrest. The opposition party says police should be arresting anyone who stands in their way.

Although investigators have until 6 January to attempt this arrest again – this is when the warrant runs out - it is unlikely they will go in once more without changing their strategy or negotiating with the security team in advance. They will want to avoid a repeat of today's failure.

They also have to contend with the throngs of Yoon's supporters, who now feel victorious and empowered. They believe they are largely responsible for the authorities' climb down. "We've won, we did it," they have been singing all afternoon.

As their confidence grows, so will their numbers, especially with the weekend approaching.

Apple has agreed to pay $95m (£77m) to settle a court case alleging some of its devices were listening to people without their permission.

The tech giant was accused of eavesdropping on its customers through its virtual assistant Siri.

The claimants also allege voice recordings were shared with advertisers.

Apple, which has not admitted any wrongdoing, has been approached for comment.

In the preliminary settlement, the tech firm denies any wrongdoing, as well as claims that it "recorded, disclosed to third parties, or failed to delete, conversations recorded as the result of a Siri activation" without consent.

Apple's lawyers also say they will confirm they have "permanently deleted individual Siri audio recordings collected by Apple prior to October 2019".

But the claimants say the tech firm recorded people who activated the virtual assistant unintentionally - without using the phrase "Hey, Siri" to wake it.

And they say advertisers who received the recordings could then look for keywords in them to better target ads.

Class action

Apple has proposed a decision date of 14 February in the court in Oakland, California.

Class action lawsuits work by a small number of people going to court on behalf of a larger group.

If they are successful, the money won is paid out across all claimants.

According to the court documents, each claimant - who has to be based in the US -could be paid up to $20 per Siri-enabled device they owned between 2014 and 2019.

In this case, the lawyers could take 30% of the fee plus expenses - which comes to just under $30m.

By settling, Apple not only denies wrongdoing, but it also avoids the risk of facing a court case which could potentially mean a much larger pay out.

The California company earned $94.9bn in the three months up to 28 September 2024.

Apple has been involved in a number of class action lawsuits in recent years,

In January 2024, it started paying out in a $500m lawsuit which claimed it deliberately slowed down iPhones in the US.

In March, it agreed to pay $490m in a class action led by Norfolk County Council in the UK.

And in November, consumer group Which? started a class action against Apple, accusing it of ripping off customers through its iCloud service.

Wayne Osmond, a founding member of family band The Osmonds, who had a string of hits in the 1970s, has died at the age of 73.

Wayne was a singer and guitarist, and co-wrote many of their biggest hits, including Crazy Horses, Goin' Home And Let Me In.

"Wayne brought so much light, laughter, and love to everyone who knew him, especially me," wrote brother Donny. "He was the ultimate optimist and was loved by everyone."

Merrill Osmond called his late brother "a genius in his ability to write music" who was "able to capture the hearts of millions of people and bring them closer to God".

He continued: "I've never known a man that had more humility. A man with absolute no guile. An individual that was quick to forgive and had the ability to show unconditional love to everyone he ever met."

Merrill and Donny said the cause of death was a stroke.

Born in August 1951, in Ogden, Utah, Wayne was the fourth oldest of nine children and raised in a Mormon household.

As a child, he started performing in a barbershop quartet with siblings Alan, Merrill and Jay.

By 1961, the harmonising brothers were regular performers at Disneyland in Florida. A year later, they made their TV debut on The Andy Williams Show.

They quickly became regulars on the show, earning the nickname "one-take Osmonds" because of their flawless, tirelessly rehearsed performances.

Younger sibling Donny joined the line-up in 1963, and they began to broaden their repertoire to include clean-cut pop songs.

Their initial singles flopped but, after the success of the Jackson 5 showed that family pop could be a commercial success, MGM Records signed the band and sent them to work at the famed R&B studio Muscle Shoals.

There, they were given a song called One Bad Apple (Don't Spoil the Whole Bunch), which had originally been written for the Jacksons but was rejected by their record label.

Perky, bubbly and bright, the song topped the US singles chart for five weeks in 1971 and established the band as a chart presence, a decade after their professional debut.

For a while, the siblings generated the same sort of fevered excitement as The Beatles.

When the band flew into Heathrow Airport in 1973, 10,000 teenage fans packed the roof gardens at a nearby office block to see them arrive. Part of the balcony railing and wall collapsed amidst a crowd surge, slightly injuring 18 women.

On their departure, hundreds of fans mobbed their limousine. A reporter for the New York Times said "they were lucky to escape alive", while the Guardian said the scenes almost led to a ban on pop groups entering the UK via Heathrow.

But pop is a fickle industry, and The Osmonds' record sales started to tail off by the mid-1970s.

At the same time, Donny and Marie Osmond were offered their own TV variety show, which became a massive hit in the US and was screened by BBC One in the UK.

As a result, the band went on hiatus and ultimately dissolved in 1980, although they regularly reformed for county fairs and reunion tours over the coming decades.

Wayne Osmond suffered a number of health problems during his life. He was diagnosed with a brain tumour as a child, which resulted in cognitive problems.

In 1994, he noticed that the condition was worsening.

"I noticed I couldn't play my saxophone any more because my head would start throbbing," he later recalled. "And my knees would fall out from under me when I was on stage. This all began happening within a week."

The subsequent surgery and related cancer treatments resulted in significant hearing loss that persisted for the rest of his life. He also suffered a previous stroke in 2012.

In 2019, the musician joined his siblings Alan, Merrill and Jay for their final ever performance on TV show The Talk.

Performing in front of a screen that showed a montage of their career highlights, the original quartet performed a song called The Last Chapter, written as a thank you to their fans.

Sister Marie, who presented the show, joined them afterwards to pay tribute, saying: "I am so honoured to be your sister. I love you guys. You've worked so hard. Enjoy your retirement."

Wayne spent his retirement indulging in hobbies including fly fishing, and spending time with his family. He maintained an optimistic outlook, telling Utah newspaper Desert News that hearing loss didn't bother him.

"My favourite thing now is to take care of my yard," he said. "I turn my hearing aids off, deaf as a doorknob, tune everything out, it's really joyful."

He is survived by wife Kathlyn and five children, Amy, Steven, Gregory, Sarah and Michelle.

He is also survived by his eight siblings: Virl, Tom, Alan, Merrill, Jay, Donny, Marie and Jimmy.

As the world rings in a new year, lawmakers are convening on the US Capitol to kick off a new Congress.

Friday marks the start of the 119th Congress, with Republican majorities in both the US House of Representatives and the Senate.

This marks a Republican trifecta given that President-elect Donald Trump is also returning to the White House later this month. The US hasn't seen unified control of all three branches of government since 2017, when Trump was last in office.

Republicans are eager to get started on an ambitious to-do list, but things may not come easy - and their majorities in both chambers of Congress leave little room for disagreement. The first test of the party's unity comes on Friday with leadership elections in the House.

Here are five things worth watching as the new session of Congress begins:

1. A Republican trifecta, but barely

Republicans may have the majority in the House, but not by much.

And it will be put to the test as soon as the session begins. The House cannot certify election results or pass laws until lawmakers select their next speaker - the leader of the chamber.

Despite an endorsement from Trump, current speaker Mike Johnson faces opposition from several members within his caucus who remain unconvinced he deserves a second chance.

The party's majority is so small that if Johnson loses just two Republicans in his campaign, it could set off a series of ballots until Republicans coalesce around a lawmaker. In 2023, it took 15 rounds of votes and four days for Kevin McCarthy to win the speakership.

Johnson already faces one hard "no" from Congressman Thomas Massie of Kentucky, but several other Republicans have put themselves in the "undecided" column.

The Republican Party was left with a five-seat majority when the final House races were called in the 2024 election. But that has shrunk after Trump tapped several House members to serve in his administration.

"Do the math," Johnson said during an early December press conference. "We have nothing to spare."

2. Confirming cabinet appointments

In the Senate, lawmakers have already selected their majority leader: South Dakota Senator John Thune won an internal Republican Party vote.

This means senators can move to official business on Friday, but they will face challenges in other ways. Lawmakers are scheduled to begin a string of confirmation hearings for some of Trump's controversial cabinet appointees.

The Senate must sign off on some 1,200 appointments for the new president's administration, but some will come with the tense hearings that attract public attention. They'll first appear before a Senate committee and answer questions, before the full chamber votes.

The nominees include Trump's pick for defence secretary, Pete Hegseth, who faces sexual assault allegations from 2017 which he denies, as well as his pick for health and human services secretary, Robert F Kennedy Jr, who is a vaccine sceptic with a history of spreading misinformation.

Trump's picks were seen making their rounds on Capitol Hill last month to win over Republican senators. But nominees will have to appear before bipartisan committees - meaning the hearings could get heated as senators from both parties use their platform to address criticisms and grievances.

However, the Senate could chose to expedite confirmation hearings from some national security nominees - following a New Year terror attack in New Orleans that left 14 dead and an explosion of a vehicle outside a Trump hotel in Las Vegas.

"The US Senate must confirm President Trump's national security team as soon as possible. Lives depend on it," Wyoming Senator John Barrasso wrote in a post on X.

A nomination that clears a committee typically does not face opposition on the full Senate floor, but given some of the initial backlash over Trump's picks, the path to confirmation may be bumpy.

3. A move on taxes

One item that rises to the top of the legislative to-do list for Congress is addressing Trump's Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017, which expires in 2025.

The 2017 legislation - which passed at a time when Republicans controlled both the House and Senate - involved a $1.5tn (£1.2tn) overhaul of the tax code, changed tax brackets and lowered tax rates for most taxpayers.

It marked the biggest tax overhaul in decades. The largest cuts went to businesses and the wealthy, which Democrats have called to reverse.

Trump campaigned on the economy - vowing to extend tax cuts, further slash corporate taxes, and eliminate tax on tips, overtime pay and Social Security income.

How Congress gets it done - an extension of the 2017 bill, a combination of old and new legislation or by other means - is up in the air.

Keeping provisions from the 2017 tax cuts would add an estimated $4tn to the deficit over the next decade, according to the Congressional Budget Office. This may not sit well with many hard-line Republicans who are adamantly opposed to increasing the nation's debt.

4. Other Republican policy wins

Expect to see legislation move on several key Republican priorities, ranging from curbing illegal immigration to cutting government regulations.

There could be proposals to reduce military aid to Ukraine, impose new tariffs, cut spending for clean energy and enhance border security.

In a November press conference, Johnson outlined a Republican agenda that aimed to reduce inflation, secure borders, restore the country's energy dominance, implement "education freedom" and "drain the swamp".

Lawmakers will also have to address the debt ceiling - the total amount the US can borrow to meet its obligations. The issue already popped up at the end of 2024 when lawmakers faced a government shutdown.

Trump demanded that lawmakers raise or even suspend the debt limit in any spending deal, but the provision was dropped from the final version of the bill that passed in both chambers.

It is possible several priorities may be combined in what is known as a reconciliation bill, which allows Congress to pass a bill on taxes, spending and the debt limit with just a majority. This method avoids the possibility of a filibuster in the Senate, in which opposing lawmakers could delay or even derail a vote.

However they choose to approach it, lawmakers may be spending more face-time on Capitol Hill to tackle their priorities in the next session.

Incoming Senate Majority Leader John Thune has scheduled notably more days and weeks for the Senate - including working days on Mondays and Fridays, which traditionally have been considered travel days.

5. New players in the game

The end of the last Congress offered a glimpse at the influence that Trump and his allies have on the congressional agenda.

Tech billionaire Elon Musk, who has been tasked with advising the Trump administration on cuts to government spending, posted dozens of times on his social media platform X to condemn a spending deal Johnson spearheaded with Democrats to avert a government shutdown.

Trump and Vice President-elect JD Vance joined in, and the bill was squashed.

Both Trump and Musk threatened to withhold funding and endorsements from sitting Republicans who supported the bipartisan spending bill, raising the question of how much sway they will have over the legislative agenda.

Musk and pharmaceutical entrepreneur Vivek Ramaswamy could have more opportunities to weigh in. The pair will be co-leading a newly-formed advisory committee focused on cuts to regulations and spending.

On the other side of the aisle, Democrats are re-grouping, with hopes to win back the House during the 2026 midterm elections. Expect to see centre-left lawmakers vying for influence.

Groups within the party all hope to shape its future - such as the Problem Solvers Caucus, a group of lawmakers focused on advancing bipartisan legislation; the Blue Dog Coalition, a group of centrist Democrats; and the centre-left, "pragmatic" New Democrat Coalition.