Carlos Garson appeals his plea of guilty to aiding and abetting in the possession of a firearm during a drug trafficking crime. 18 U.S.C. § 924(c)(1)(A), (c)(2). We affirm.

Garson argues that we should vacate his plea of guilty for two reasons, but he waived appellate review of both arguments. Garson argues that there was in *921 sufficient evidence that he could reasonably foresee that his coconspirator would have a firearm, but Garson waived his right to challenge the sufficiency of the evidence by pleading guilty. See United States v. Ternus, 598 F.3d 1251, 1254 (11th Cir. 2010). Garson also argues that his plea was entered unknowingly, but Garson failed to object after the magistrate judge recommended that the district court accept the plea of guilty, see United States v. Garcia-Sandobal, 703 F.3d 1278, 1283 (11th Cir. 2013), and Garson invited the district court to accept his plea by filing a notice stating that he did not object to the recommendation, see United States v. Harris, 443 F.3d 822, 824 (11th Cir. 2006).

We AFFIRM Garson’s conviction.