It depends. If you were presented enough evidence to agree Sandy Hoax happened, I suppose I can understand your perspective. But all I was presented with was a story that didn't make sense, which led to more questions that the media conveniently didn't question or investigate. And then the guy who declared it was a hoax - instead of being presented with a refutation - was sued for millions of dollars in some sort of kangaroo court? Whoever gets sued for millions of dollars for hurt feelings? Anthony Fauci and Bill Gates didn't even see court for the 10s or 100s of thousands they've maimed and murdered by their lies, not to mention hurt feelings. And the obvious political motive - gun grabbing.
Burden of proof is on the one making the claim (i.e. Sandy Hoax actually happened), so I therefore reject it until presented with sufficient (and consistent) evidence that it did. And for the argument against that so many people would have had to be in on it? Only need to look so far as the election fraud to see that can easily happen. Foreign-sponsored, organised crime. Some call it treason.