Hanity has expanded his argument against the port deal: since someone or institution(s) in the UAE has monetarily supported Hamas, and they do not recognize Israel, and they boycott Israeli goods and services, the United States therefore cannot support DPW running US port terminals.
Hannity does have a point, but he is not being consistent in his principled stance.
To take Hannity's logic further, we would have to look at EVERY foreign interest that does business in the United States. We have to take the process further than the UAE buying port logistic operations, we would have to examine national security for all countries that we do business with. To including the following countries, as you said Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, Oman, Kuwait, China, France, Turkey, Yugoslavia, Bosnia, Germany, Russia, etcetera...
As you see, if the United States inhibited foreign business in our country because foreigners or foreign organization/institution(s) have supported terrorists or terrorist nation(s), to include not recognizing Israel, it would smack up against the modern global economy.
The United States cannot disengage from the global economy and go to an isolationist policy. The economic upheaval would make it impractical -- to say the least.
Hannity is either blind to his argument's impracticality, or he is being disingenuous.
Rephrase: ...We have to take the process further than the UAE buying port logistic operations, we would have to examine the issues of national security, of human rights violations, recognition of Isreal, and of the support terrorists, for all countries that we do business with....