Perhaps it's because harassment is easier to understand. It's simple, there is a claim of wrongdoing and a denial that it happened. When you start into a complex issue like pandemic response, it gets messy. What were the motivations behind the actions taken, what information was available at the time those actions were taken, what process went into the decision.
It's very easy to see a better answer looking back, not so simple when you're in the moment. While it looks like Cuomo screwed the pooch, he might have actually been doing what he thought was the right thing at that time.
I don't care for the guy, but I need to see the entire sequence of events laid out before making my (important to no one) decision on his guilt.
I'm having a similar problem with HR1. Read the entire document, liked a lot of it, have real problems with some of it, didn't understand some of it. Went looking for information beyond the document itself and found the normal pile of extremist garbage. As with every major change in how government works and what it does, the devil is in the details.