Israeli media shared footage from their own cameras that appears to show at least one rocket fired from Palestinians in Gaza falling short and landing on a hospital in their own territory.

The footage, shared by Keshet 12 News, clearly shows multiple rockets launching toward Israel on Tuesday. Moments later, a blast is seen in Gaza midway along the rockets’ trajectory.

‘This is proof of Israel’s claims that it was actually missiles from the Gaza Strip that shot into the direction of the Alahali Hospital in Gaza City and not from Israel,’ Keshet 12 anchor Yonit Levi says of the footage.

‘This is Channel 12’s camera. It is a camera situated in the city of Netivot, and its view is of the Gaza Strip,’ she continues. ‘You can see the rockets… fired over the hospital…  and you can see the blast. So that is proof of the fact that it came from the Gaza Strip.’

The footage comes after Hamas claimed Israel hit the hospital and killed 500 people with an airstrike Tuesday night. Israel immediately rebutted the claims, and President Biden has said that data from the Pentagon supports Israel’s assertion that the blast originated from fire in Gaza. Israel believes the rocket was fired by the Palestinian Islamic Jihad, a State Department designated foreign terrorist organization.

‘I was outraged by the bombing of the hospital yesterday. Based on what I’ve seen, it was done by the other team. Not you,’ Biden said to Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu in a meeting early Wednesday. ‘But there’s a lot of people out there who are not sure.’

Biden reiterated his belief that Israel was not to blame later on Wednesday. National Security Council spokeswoman Adrienne Watson also reaffirmed the U.S. position.

‘While we continue to collect information, our current assessment, based on analysis of overhead imagery, intercepts and open source information, is that Israel is not responsible for the explosion at the hospital in Gaza yesterday,’ she wrote.

Biden met with Israeli officials throughout Wednesday, pledging further support for the country and warning Iran and Hezbollah not to intervene.

House Judiciary Chairman Jim Jordan, R-Ohio, has lost a second-round vote to win the speaker’s gavel on Wednesday, calling into doubt whether he can ever be elected.

Twenty-two Republicans voted against Jordan on this round, after 20 did so on Tuesday during the initial vote. Jordan needs to secure a majority threshold of 217 votes to win.

Reps. Vern Buchanan, R-Fla., Drew Ferguson, R-Ga., Marianette Miller-Meeks, R-Iowa, and Pete Stauber, R-Minn., all joined Jordan’s growing opposition, having voted for him in the first round and then for other candidates on Wednesday.

Two holdouts from the previous day, Reps. Doug LaMalfa, R-Calif., and Victoria Spartz, R-Ind., voted for Jordan on Wednesday.

Asked what his next move was, Jordan said he would ‘keep talking to members.’ 

‘We don’t know when we’re going to have the next vote, but we want to have conversations with our colleagues,’ Jordan said.

Even before the vote, the Ohio Republican’s allies conceded that he could likely lose support on the second round but remained optimistic that he would pull through. 

‘Just so there’s no surprises: Jordan will likely have FEWER votes today than yesterday — as I expected,’ House Freedom Caucus Chairman Scott Perry, R-Pa., said on X. ‘This is the fight — which Jim Jordan represents — to end the status quo, and it ain’t easy…Stay strong and keep praying.”

But some Republicans have suggested a second Jordan loss could mean it’s time to evaluate other options.

‘If the number keeps going up then that’s a great sign, and we should continue to try to build upon that consensus until we can reach the 217,’ said Rep. Nicole Malliotakis, R-N.Y., a Jordan supporter.

‘And if it goes down, well then, we have to go back to the drawing board and have a conversation about what our other options are.’

Judiciary Chairman Jim Jordan, R-Ohio, intends to hold a third round vote for speaker on Thursday, a source familiar told Fox News Digital.

‘We’re going to keep going,’ Jordan’s spokesman told Fox News Digital earlier when asked if there will be a third round.

All House Democrats and 22 Republicans voted against Jordan’s bid for speaker on Wednesday. That’s two more GOP lawmakers than who voted against Jordan on Tuesday.

But nevertheless, Jordan’s allies have insisted that it was not an immediate sign of his campaign for speaker faltering. 

‘Don’t lose faith if [Jordan] loses a few votes on the second ballot. I’m committed to voting as many times as we must to get Jim elected as Speaker, as long as he is putting his name forward,’ Rep. Jeff Duncan, R-S.C., wrote on X. ‘If that means we vote all night, then buckle up ’cause we will vote all night!’

And earlier, House Freedom Caucus Chairman Scott Perry, R-Pa., also expressed optimism.

‘Just so there’s no surprises: Jordan will likely have FEWER votes today than yesterday — as I expected,’ Perry said on social media.

‘This is the fight — which Jim Jordan represents — to end the status quo, and it ain’t easy… Stay strong and keep praying.’

Rumors of a House GOP conference meeting immediately after the vote sprung up but dissipated quickly amid confusion over the next steps.

Meanwhile, a contingency is building of House Republicans who want to empower interim Speaker Patrick McHenry, R-N.C., with temporary abilities to move legislation, at least through Nov. 17. 

‘At some point, we’re going to have to make a rational decision as to whether or not we’re going to continue to fight over who the speaker is, or empower Patrick McHenry to allow us to go back to world,’ Rep. Marc Molinaro, R-N.Y., who has voted for Jordan in the last two rounds, told reporters. 

‘The world is burning. And I don’t think many people we represent want us spending days upon days deciding who sits in the chair.’

Rep. Mike Lawler, R-N.Y., who voted for ousted Speaker Kevin McCarthy, R-Calif., on both rounds, called to empower McHenry immediately.

‘I think it is imperative that we pass the resolution empowering Patrick McHenry to serve as the temporary speaker, and, you know, hopefully we will be able to find consensus in short order on a speaker,’ Lawler said. ‘I continue to believe that Kevin McCarthy is the right person to lead this House. He never should have been removed as speaker.’

Former President Donald Trump and President Biden are running neck-and-neck in a new 2024 presidential election poll, but the data suggests an independent bid by Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. could upend the race in Biden’s favor.

According to a Marist poll released Tuesday, 49% of registered voters said they would support Biden, 46% Trump and 5% remained undecided — all without Kennedy in the race.

Those numbers shifted dramatically for Trump and Biden with Kennedy running as an independent candidate, but appeared to hurt Trump’s chances for reclaiming the White House more than Biden’s odds of winning a second term.

The poll showed Kennedy winning 16% support among voters, Trump 37% and Biden 44%. Just 3% were undecided.

The biggest shift with a Kennedy candidacy came from independent voters, showing a massive drop in support for Trump (49% to 34%) and Biden (43% to 33%), according to the poll. Kennedy received support from 29% of independents.

Republican support for Trump also dropped significantly from 91% to 81%, with Kennedy receiving support from 11% of GOP voters.

Biden also saw a drop in support from Democrats with Kennedy in the race, from 91% to 86%, but not as a significant a loss as Trump’s among Republicans. Kennedy received support from 9% of Democrats.

Kennedy announced on Oct. 9 he would be running as an independent after attempting a run against Biden and fellow Democrat Marianne Williamson for the party’s presidential nomination. He ultimately made the decision after the Democratic National Committee maintained its backing of Biden and refused to hold any primary debates.

Get the latest updates from the 2024 campaign trail, exclusive interviews and more at our Fox News Digital election hub.

The U.S. has no responsibility to keep its allies on the ‘cutting edge’ of artificial intelligence (AI) development — unless it is a matter of national security, a former CIA director and retired Army officer tells Fox News Digital.

‘First and foremost is to ensure that we are on the cutting edge,’ retired four-star Gen. David Petraeus said during a recent Zoom interview.

‘Certainly, we should share to varying degrees with our closest partners, and they share with us — again, no one of us is smarter than all of us together in these kinds of endeavors — but it’s not our job entirely to ensure that they are proceeding along these lines, unless it’s, of course, in our national interest to do so, and it is in a number of different cases,’ he explained.

The pace of AI development has dominated conversation since public access to ChatGPT in November 2022, particularly with concerns over who will stay at the top of the game — a race that drove countries to reassess their investments in the burgeoning field. 

China and the U.S. in particular have focused on developing AI as much as possible in different fields, though the U.S. has discussed a far more regulated approach, as opposed to China’s more hands-free environment, as long as the AI passes certain reported threshold tests for reflecting socialist values. 

The U.K. over the summer announced that it would invest $125 million in computer chips to keep pace with the AI development from nations like the U.S. and China, but experts and officials argued even that significant investment was not nearly enough to stay at the top of the field. 

Cooperation has therefore remained a key point of the discussion, especially when the U.S. has certain bilateral intelligence agreements, such as the Five Eyes Alliance with the U.K., Canada, Australia and New Zealand. 

The White House touted one such agreement, the ‘Atlantic Declaration,’ signed in June of this year, as something that would ensure that the ‘unique alliance is adapted, reinforced and reimagined for the challenges of this moment,’ including the ‘handful of critical and emerging technologies’ such as AI that are ‘forming the backbone of new industries and shaping our national security landscape.’ 

Petraeus highlighted ‘interoperability’ as one of the chief reasons the U.S. might look to keep allies at the ‘bleeding edge’ of development, saying that in those cases, ‘it’s incumbent on us to share together,’ because any such agreement is a ‘two-way street.’ 

‘The closer you are as a partner, the more we should be focused on that, but it’s not our job to ensure that everybody is making the most of any more than it is that we ensure that they’re doing well in all the other areas,’ he argued, noting that uneven development of technology and weapons has remained a challenge ‘for decades’ and that a gap in AI development does not present ‘a massive issue.’ 

Such shortcomings in the past have required the U.S. at times to figure out how to compensate and help a country deal with ‘lack of certain capabilities,’ which Petraeus acknowledged often required the U.S. to share what it had or link the country into the larger American mechanisms, as in the case of air support or drones or aerial medevac.

‘Some countries in NATO were on the cutting edge, the bleeding edge of technological advances, [with] the U.S., of course, leading the way and then others are well behind, but we’ve always had this in some respects,’ he said. 

‘That’s the job of the country that leads coalitions, and in the most important cases, that is going to be in the United States.’ 

Petraeus served 37 years in the military, achieving the rank of four-star general and overseeing operations in Iraq and Afghanistan before taking over as director of the CIA — a post he left in late 2012. 

AI at the time remained in a nascent stage and did not have much integration: Petraeus said the most he saw was machine learning and that development ‘galloped ahead’ in more recent years, which he has witnessed through his work at an investment firm.

That pace of development has been ‘nothing short of breathtaking,’ the general said, stressing that it is ‘incumbent on all of us… certainly incumbent on those in the defense world, but also the business world, in the intelligence world, all the other worlds… to identify how this can be employed in ways that improve productivity, efficiency, effectiveness.’ 

The al-Ahali Hospital in Gaza City was struck Tuesday night, and hundreds were reportedly killed in the blast. Hamas initially claimed the hospital was attacked in an Israeli strike; Israel countered after an investigation that it was hit by an errant missile launched by terrorists in Gaza itself. 

Online video making the rounds on social media suggests the al-Ahali Hospital in Gaza City was not directly hit by a rocket on Tuesday, but instead the missile appears to have struck a nearby parking lot, leading to many conflicting claims of who was responsible, where the missile struck and how many people died.

Who’s responsible?

Hamas was targeting Tel Aviv with rocket fire on Tuesday, and has been targeting central Israel multiple times each day.

Shortly after the blast, senior Hamas officials told Fox, ‘After the barbaric attack, it’s too early to talk about this.’

After an investigation, Israel said on Tuesday the rocket was fired by Palestinian Islamic Jihad, a State Department designated foreign terrorist organization backed by Iran.

‘An analysis of IDF operational systems indicates that a barrage of rockets was fired by terrorists in Gaza, passing in close proximity to the al-Ahli [Baptist] hospital in Gaza at the time it was hit,’ IDF officials said. ‘Intelligence from multiple sources we have in our hands indicates that Islamic Jihad is responsible for the failed rocket launch which hit the hospital in Gaza.’

While Israel rebutted the claims immediately, President Biden, who was in Israel on Wednesday, stated intelligence from the Pentagon supports Israel’s assertion that the blast originated from rocket fire in Gaza.

Biden reiterated his belief that Israel was not to blame later on Wednesday. National Security Council spokesperson Adrienne Watson also reaffirmed the U.S. position.

‘While we continue to collect information, our current assessment, based on analysis of overhead imagery, intercepts and open source information, is that Israel is not responsible for the explosion at the hospital in Gaza yesterday,’ she wrote.

Where the rockets fell

The failed rocket launch was initially reported to have been a direct hit on the hospital.

Israeli media showed footage from their own cameras that appears to show at least one rocket fired by Palestinians in Gaza falling short and landing on a hospital in their own territory.

Shared by Keshet 12 News, the footage clearly shows multiple rockets launching toward Israel on Tuesday. Moments later, a blast is seen in Gaza midway along the rockets’ trajectory.

Images and video making the rounds on social media tell a different story from the one Hamas initially told.

The images depict a parking lot with several damaged cars, and in the middle, a divot from where an object exploded.

When compared to images of typical Israeli missile strikes that show craters after the explosion, the parking lot had a small indentation, showing a different type of missile may have been responsible for the blast.

While the rocket appears to have struck a parking lot, the Hamas-run hospital treating wounded Palestinians and sheltering many others was certainly damaged, but not destroyed.

Casualty numbers

Another conflict point centers around the number of deaths from the blast.

The blast in the parking lot was enough to damage the hospital, but according to sources at the scene, it was not enough to destroy the facility, calling the reported number of deaths into question.

The Gaza Health Ministry initially reported that at least 500 people were killed at al-Ahli Baptist Hospital in Gaza City, and Hamas said it was the result of an Israel airstrike.

At this time, the number of people killed in the blast is unconfirmed, though Reuters quoted the Hamas-run Palestinian health ministry saying there were 471 people dead as of 3 p.m. on Wednesday.

Biden met with Israeli officials throughout Wednesday, pledging further support for the country and warning Iran and Hezbollah not to intervene.

Anders Hagstrom of Fox News Digital contributed to this report.

CONCORD, N.H. – Former President Donald Trump may not be the only 2024 Republican contender to rule out participating in next month’s third GOP presidential nomination debate in Florida.

Vivek Ramaswamy would not commit to the Nov. 8 showdown in Miami.

‘I’m considering my options,’ the multimillionaire biotech entrepreneur and first-time presidential candidate told Fox News on Wednesday after filing to place his name on the presidential primary ballot in New Hampshire.

Trump, who remains the commanding polling and fundraising front-runner for the Republican nomination as he makes his third straight White House run, pointed to his enormous lead over his large field of rivals as he skipped the first two debates. Late last month, Trump campaign adviser Chris LaCivita said Trump would not take the stage at the third debate.

Trump’s campaign is calling for all future debates to be canceled and that the Republican National Committee – which is organizing the debates – should ‘refocus its manpower and money’ on defeating Democrats in next year’s election.

As first reported last month by Fox News, the RNC raised the polling and donor thresholds that 2024 primary candidates must reach to make the stage at the third debate.

To participate, each candidate must have a minimum of 70,000 unique donors to their campaign or exploratory committee, including 200 donors in 20 or more states. 

The White House hopefuls must also reach 4% support in two national polls, or reach 4% in one national poll and 4% in two statewide polls conducted in Iowa, New Hampshire, Nevada or South Carolina – the four states that lead off the Republican presidential nominating calendar.

Candidates are also required to sign a pledge agreeing to support the eventual Republican presidential nominee. They must agree not to participate in any non-RNC sanctioned debates for the rest of the 2024 election cycle and agree to data-sharing with the national party committee.

Ramaswamy on Wednesday reiterated that he’s reached the criteria for the third debate but may join Trump in opting out. His campaign has been having internal discussions about whether he should participate in the Miami showdown.

The candidate, who took plenty of incoming fire from some of his onstage rivals at the first two debates, said that ‘my view is what best advances substantive debate for the future of the Republican Party and for the future of our country, and so we’re weighing what best accomplishes that.’

‘I’m going to be looking at what best does, and we’ll evaluate whether participating in that third debate really is something that moves the ball,’ he highlighted.

Ramaswamy was joined onstage at the second debate by Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis, former U.N. Ambassador and former South Carolina Gov. Nikki Haley, Sen. Tim Scott of South Carolina, former Gov. Chris Christie of New Jersey, former Vice President Mike Pence and North Dakota Gov. Doug Burgum.

Former Arkansas Gov. Asa Hutchinson, who qualified for the first debate, fell short and failed to make the stage at the second showdown.

The RNC announced Monday that it selected NBC News, Salem Radio Network, the Republican Jewish Coalition (RJC) and Rumble as partners for the debate, which will take place at the Adrienne Arsht Center for the Performing Arts of Miami-Dade County.

The third debate will be held almost two months before the Jan. 15 Iowa caucuses, which is the leadoff contest in the 2024 GOP presidential nominating calendar.