Is Al-Albani considered lenient in authenticating hadiths because they contain narrators criticized by Al-Daraqutni and Ibn 'Adi?

Shaykh al-Albani is one of the great scholars of Hadith, and many scholars and researchers have accepted his rulings on Hadith. However, later Hadith scholars tend to be more lenient than earlier ones. Shaykh al-Albani has been described as lenient in elevating some Hadiths to a degree of hasan (good) or sahih (authentic) that they do not reach. He also does not always observe anomalies in the matn (text of the Hadith), and sometimes he authenticates a Hadith based solely on the authenticity of its isnad (chain of narration) without considering its defects. He may also authenticate a Hadith based on the multitude of its weak طرق (chains/paths) despite their extreme weakness. He shows leniency in gathering weak chains to rule a Hadith as hasan li ghayrihi (good due to external corroboration), even when some of them contain munkarat (rejected narrations). However, he is very precise in authenticating Hadith, and if he weakens a Hadith, you will generally find no further contention regarding it. Like all Hadith scholars, his statements can be accepted or rejected. He has a methodology that other scholars disagree with, and he demonstrates leniency in some areas and strictness in others.