WASHINGTON – President Donald Trump, who lies that the 2020 election was stolen from him on a near-daily basis, claimed in a much-hyped White House speech on Thursday that US elections are vulnerable to hacking and worse than those in third-world countries as he renewed assertions that a “deep state” withheld information from him.

“Members of the deep state, very, very famous group of people, many cases, in our intelligence agency, worked to actively suppress and downplay information about the extent of China’s sinister election meddling, covering it up from both the president and the American people like nobody thought was possible,” Trump said during 25 minutes of disjointed, often difficult-to-follow remarks from the East Room.

Trump’s many claims, though, are rebutted by a declassified intelligence report released in March 2021, after the classified version was given to him on Jan. 7, 2021 — the day after his failed coup attempt to remain in power despite having lost his 2020 reelection bid. That report was written or approved by Trump’s own first-term political appointees.

That report found that while China obtained publicly available voter registration information, it did not attempt to interfere in the actual election process. A minority view in that report states that China preferred that Trump lose the election to Democrat Joe Biden. The report also said Russia again worked to help Trump win, although not to the extent that it had four years earlier.

If the speech had a stated purpose, it was to encourage Republicans to pass the SAVE Act, legislation endlessly hyped by conservatives as necessary to crack down on mostly non-existent voter fraud. But Senate Republicans have repeatedly made clear to Trump the legislation has no chance of passage.

“Congress must pass the SAVE America Act,” Trump said. “How easy is that to do, unless you want to cheat? The only reason you wouldn’t do it is you want to cheat.”

That left many Democrats warning the speech had a different, darker purpose: To create a justification for Trump to dispute the results of the midterm elections.

“Trump and Republicans continue to lay the groundwork for interfering with the midterm elections in an attempt to cling to power,” Democratic National Committee Chair Ken Martin said in a statement after the speech. “There’s one simple reason for this brazen power grab: Republicans know they’re going to lose the midterms. Americans are outraged over Trump and Republicans’ agenda of chaos, corruption, and skyrocketing costs and are going to reject it at the ballot box in November.”

Indeed, the speech united Democrats in opposition ― all 24 of the party’s governors signed on to a joint statement condemning the address ― while generating comparatively little excitement among congressional Republicans, many of whom want Trump to focus more on voters’ economic concerns, which he briefly touched on at the start of the speech.

Trump said he ordered the release of previously classified material that he claims backs up his contentions, though at least some of the documents appear to contradict or complicate his claims.

In his speech, Trump also attacked vote tabulating machines as vulnerable to hacking — while neglecting to mention that most US jurisdictions use paper ballots that can be hand-counted in election disputes. Georgia’s 2020 election — which Trump tried to steal by coercing state officials into “finding” him sufficient votes – was hand-counted, and Biden remained the winner.

Trump nevertheless disparaged US elections and focused on the SAVE Act, which would mandate voter ID and sharply limit mail voting, which Trump called “inherently corrupt.” Democrats oppose the legislation, arguing it would amount to voter suppression.

“This is worse than any third-world country. There’s no third-world country that has elections like we have,” Trump claimed. “We have very important elections coming up. We want those elections to be honest.”

Trump solicited and then knowingly and willingly accepted Russian help to win the 2016 election — but has ever since then loudly claimed that investigations into that collusion were a “hoax.” He has also tried to claim that other candidates took foreign assistance. Indeed, his obsession with the conspiracy theory that Ukraine helped Democrat Hillary Clinton that year ultimately led to his impeachment for trying in 2019 to extort that country’s president into publicly launching an investigation into Trump’s 2020 opponent, Biden.

Trump did not in his Thursday night speech explicitly claim the 2020 election was stolen from him, although he did hint at it: “We can never watch a stolen election again.”

That false claim has been central to his political identity since the night of his Nov. 3, 2020 defeat.

As states continued counting votes into the morning — as his own staff had told him would happen — Trump went to the media in the pre-dawn hours of Nov. 4 and declared that he had won the election and demanded that election officials stop counting ballots. Later that afternoon, Trump posted a tweet “claiming” the electoral votes in four states, as if he were in a schoolyard calling dibs on playground equipment.

“We hereby claim the State of Michigan,” he wrote.

Even after enough states had posted sufficient results for news outlets to declare Biden the winner, Trump continued his lying, as he did even after the Electoral College had voted, although he soon after began demanding that Congress overturn that result when it met for the ceremonial ratification of the election on Jan. 6.

It was that effort, combined with inflammatory language that Americans “wouldn’t have a country anymore” if they did not “fight like hell” to prevent the election certification, that led thousands of his followers to attack the Capitol that afternoon, where they injured 140 police officers and led to the deaths of five people.

Trump managed to remain silent about the election for some weeks, but by the summer of 2021 was back to publicly lying about it again.

Even after returning to office in January 2025, Trump has made his 2020 election lie a feature of the vast majority of his public remarks and question-and-answer sessions with reporters.

He has also ordered investigations into the 2020 elections by his various intelligence and law enforcement agencies, but so far nothing has come of those efforts.

Listen to Commons People, the podcast that makes politics easy. Every week, Kevin Schofield and Kate Nicholson unpack the week’s biggest stories to keep you informed. Join us for straightforward analysis of what’s going on at Westminster.

Sleep can be a useful indicator of a person’s overall health. The quality of our shut-eye might say a lot about our dementia risk and even heart health.

Some research suggests it might reflect our intelligence, too.

Spikes in our brain activity as we nap, called “spindles”, and our “chronotype” – or our natural sleep-wake cycle – have been linked to different cognitive abilities in studies.

Here’s what the science says:

According to a 2026 meta-analysis published in the journal Frontiers in Sleep, faster “sleep spindles” were linked to greater cognitive abilities.

Sleep spindles are very brief (we’re talking 0.5-second to 3-second) bursts in brain activity that happen during the non-rapid eye movement (NREM) stage of sleep. NREM sleep usually accounts for 70-80% of our total sleep time.

They get their name from how they look on a brain scan – the waves “spike” as these “burstlike signals” arise.

Researchers think they might help with memory consolidation. And in the 2026 Frontiers paper, scientists linked the strength of people’s higher-frequency “sleep spindles” to higher intelligence.

How long these bursts last didn’t seem to matter when it came to intelligence.

We also get lower-frequency sleep spindles, which are slower and appear closer to the front of the brain.

The more densely-packed the frequency of these are during sleep, the likelier we are to score better during cognitive tests. This seems to be truer fo adults than children, and held even more true still for older adults.

Using data from more than 26,000 people involved in the UK Biobank, scientists found “night owls” tended to do 7.5%-13.5% better on cognitive tests than “early birds”.

Intermediate sleepers, or those who were a mix of both waking types, also did 10.6%-6.3% better than those who only rose early.

The study’s lead author, Dr Raha West, said: “Our study found that adults who are naturally more active in the evening (what we called ‘eveningness’) tended to perform better on cognitive tests than those who are ‘morning people’. Rather than just being personal preferences, these chronotypes could impact our cognitive function.”

However, experts stressed that this doesn’t mean every night owl is smarter than every early bird. Their results reflected an overall trend, not an absolute rule.

And regardless of sleep type, getting too much or too little sleep – less than seven or more than nine hours a night – was linked to lower cognitive scores.

You probably already know that exercise can help with healthier ageing, and that hanging out with your friends has even been linked to greater longevity.

But sometimes, the realities of adult life – be they injuries, sore joints, or just a busy schedule – can feel like a major hurdle to hitting those goals (no pun intended).

Enter: walking football, a modified exercise researchers think could be a “promising candidate for inclusion in public health initiatives targeting healthy ageing”.

Play is quite different from that of “normal” football. It’s a no-contact sport, there’s an above-head-height restriction on the ball, and you can’t do “headers”, among other rules.

Games are usually six-a-side. And, of course, teams walk instead of running.

This is all designed to make the sport as low-impact as possible for players. Speaking to Arthritis UK, 85-year-old walking footballer John, who has knee osteoarthritis, said: “The rules really limit injuries.

“The chances of being injured are really quite low. There is no running or physical contact, and we play three-touch football which gives a more level playing field for players of varying abilities.”

Though it’s often associated with over-50s, the Walking Football Association (WFA) points out that players of all ages can take part.

It might be especially useful for “players in their late 40s with health issues, younger players returning from injury, or [who have] referrals from [their] Health Care Provider,” they explained.

A narrative review of the benefits and risks of walking football, published in the journal BMJ Open Sport & Exercise Medicine, said that the sport’s “slower pace and reduced physical contact make it accessible and safe for individuals with various chronic conditions”.

Additionally, some research showed it led to “modest improvements” in players’ heart health and body composition.

The game was also associated with a range of mental health benefits, including better social connections and a greater sense of purpose (both of which have been linked to better ageing and even a lower risk of dementia).

Then, there’s the player-friendliness of the game to consider: “Walking football appeals to middle-aged and older adults, including those with chronic health conditions, due to its rule modifications that promote accessibility and inclusivity”.

Walking football can help to beat loneliness among an “often-isolated” older group, and may carry the usual benefits of exercise and walking, including lower type 2 diabetes risk, decreased blood pressure, and stronger bones, the WFA added.

Researchers think that more data is needed on how walking football might affect injury risk. But overall, the review reads, it “shows promise as a safe strategy to promote physical and mental health among diverse populations,” older people very much included.

You can find your nearest walking football club through the WFA’s site.

Donald Trump’s latest attempts to sow doubt into US voters’ minds about the American electoral system will be “quickly forgotten”, according to a BBC expert.

The US president claimed there are “shocking vulnerabilities” in the US election security in a dramatic speech on Thursday, three months before he faces the midterms.

In a primetime address, Trump accused China of interfering in the 2020 election – which he lost to Joe Biden – and made a series of unsubstantiated claims about voter fraud and foreign meddling.

He claimed he had declassified intelligence files which showed Beijing was trying to stop him from winning – but did not present clear evidence.

Previous US intelligence assessments also reported that it had “high confidence” China did not interfere with the 2020 result.

According to the BBC’s North America editor Sarah Smith, this “very dramatic” moment ended up “falling rather flat”.

“He was trying to lay out a picture of China attempting to influence the 2020 election,” she told BBC Radio 4’s Today programme. “But he didn’t really have any evidence that they had done.

“For instance, he was claiming China had obtained details of millions of voters, the kind of information that you would need to register to vote.

“The implication being that somehow that might be used in a fraudulent way. That’s information which is easily available online.”

She said Trump was “hoping people would draw the conclusion that fraud had been committed”.

However, Smith added: “[China] is probably not surprised that Donald Trump is talking about this now, especially since we are now only weeks away from crucial mid-term elections.

“He wants Congress to pass legislation changing the way people vote, insisting for instance that they prove they’re US citizens before they have the right to vote.”

Trump also claimed the “deep state is conspiring to keep this information [about China] from the American people”.

But Smith noted there is a “gap between what [the White House is] producing and claiming as evidence and the allegations the president was making in his speech”.

Trump also alleged the media wanted to continue “this plot” after several networks refused to air his speech amid concerns over his unsubstantiated claims.

Smith said: “Along with American enemies, the CIA and establishment figures, the media were also being pegged as people who were complicit in the cover-up of electoral fraud in America.”

Pointing to a new Washington Post-Ipsos survey which put his approval rating on 37%, Smith said Trump’s “poll ratings are not great” right now, either.

She continued: “This isn’t going to move the dial very much because I don’t think it’s going to be huge news, to be perfectly honest.

“More unsubstantiated claims about electoral fraud from Donald Trump are not anything new.

“If voters are not paying much attention to that, that’s probably to Donald Trump’s benefit. They would much rather hear him talk about affordability, the cost of living, what he’s trying to do to bring down prices, what he’s trying to do to end the war in Iran.

“It was billed as a very, very dramatic moment, but it’s one that fell rather flat – and I think will probably be quickly forgotten.”

Listen to Commons People, the podcast that makes politics easy. Every week, Kevin Schofield and Kate Nicholson unpack the week’s biggest stories to keep you informed. Join us for straightforward analysis of what’s going on at Westminster.

Critics are a little split over the final chapter in the Heartstopper story, which debuted on Friday morning.

Rather than a fourth season of the popular teen drama, Heartstopper Forever takes the form of a feature-length film, marking one last outing for Kit Connor and Joe Locke as boyfriends Nick and Charlie.

While critics are pretty much in agreement that those who’ve been loyal followers of Heartstopper’s first three seasons will find the movie to be a satisfying end, most have lamented that its focus on Nick and Charlie’s relationship means the wider cast has been sidelined.

Meanwhile, there’s some contention over whether or not the film allows its characters to mature convincingly, with some suggesting that the “wholesome” nature of the central couple’s relationship holds Heartstopper Forever back.

Here’s a selection of what critics have had to say about Heartstopper Forever so far…

“Heartstopper’s 90-minute finale of nice kids being (mostly) nice to each other could have had me reaching for my phone. Instead, I settled back like a proud parent to enjoy the cast navigate their final year of school and their evolving relationships […] LGBTQ+ children and their families need a little hope and happiness right now. Heartstopper delivers that with pretty, pastel bows on.”

“From the off, [author Alice Oseman] signposts that Charlie and Nick are in a different stage of life to when we last saw them […] Up until now, the show has rarely interrogated the stability of their romance, but these confrontations are also a showcase of how Locke and Connor have matured as performers […] Alas, the shorter length versus a full eight-episode season means that there are fewer scenes to share out among Heartstopper’s swelling ensemble.”

“Heartstopper Forever is a profoundly romantic, emotionally enlightened and essential viewing experience for anyone who has wept over the sweet simplicity of Nick and Charlie’s story before.”

“This last chapter is very much the story of Charlie and Nick […] There are a few joyous moments, of course, but it isn’t focused on falling in love or trying to navigate sex and intimacy for the first time. It’s about the work required to maintain a connection across different chapters of life.”

“As a stand-alone film, yes, Hearstopper Forever is far from perfect. But for those who’ve followed Nick and Charlie’s journey these past few years, the movie feels like a fitting farewell to the characters we’ve grown to know and love.”

“Part of Nick and Charlie’s glow comes from the extended cast that Heartstopper Forever mainly ignores. The film isn’t without its aww-inspiring moments, but the odd pacing, relentless Easter eggs and montages often leave it feeling like its own fan cam edit as it attempts to put the neatest possible bow on the couple’s puppy love. Nick and Charlie are supposed to be all grown up, but Heartstopper Forever treats them with kid gloves.”

“Fans were relieved that this beloved show would at least be getting a proper farewell. Sadly, it’s a pretty patchy one […] For long stretches, Heartstopper’s supporting characters barely get a look-in. […] Thankfully, Heartstopper‘s prevailing sweetness carries it to the finish.”

“All the focus on them does mean that Heartstopper Forever is a little too busy to focus on Charlie and Nick’s pals. It’s a drawback from season three, because those eight episodes meaningfully crafted their lovely queer community, emphasising the value of having people to lean on at a young age, especially if the rest of the world doesn’t understand who they are just yet […] Yet none of this detracts from Heartstopper Forever being a satisfying conclusion to this story, of two boys whose illuminating journey of self-discovery feels rare and valuable on screen, even if there’s a certain cringe factor to it.”

“If CBeebies made queer teen drama, it might be something like this. Heartstopper Forever arrives with the gentle air of an especially placid episode of Hey Duggee, but mixed with a break-up, a handful of sex scenes and a vigorous plea for trans rights.”

Heartstopper Forever is now streaming on Netflix. Read HuffPost UK’s review of the film in full here.