This hadith from Albukhari that Albani classified as weak:
"I saw the Messenger of Allah during his Hajj, on the Day of 'Arafah. He was upon his camel Al-Qaswa, giving a Khutbah, so he said: 'O people! Indeed, I have left among you, that which if you hold fast to it, you shall not go astray: The Book of Allah and my family, the people of my house.'" This hadith claim that Ali and his lineage are the true rulers of the Ummah.
Musnad Ahmad 16245—[Mua’wiya said]: "I saw the prophet sucking on the tongue or the lips of Al-Hassan son of Ali, may the prayers of Allah be upon him. For no tongue or lips that the prophet sucked on will be tormented (by hell fire)".
This hadith and other talking about the prophet sucking the tongue of Al-Hassan, or the penis of Hussein, which they aren't true, but what are the reasons behind these hadiths becoming narrated ones? To show that Al-Hassan drank from the spit of the prophet, from his body water so for that he is espcial.
There are other hadiths about Ali sons and the prophet which are inappropiate and was classified as weak, but they go by the same logic, the prophet kissing one of Ali's sons, and threatening anyone who tries to steal their right to rule or anyone who will kill them.
I'm trying to be fair to you but you're making things difficult for me, you made a very specific claim that there are fabricated hadith in Sahih Muslim and Bukhari put in by Shias. This is a very serious claim as you're essentially saying they've been corrupted while the sahihayn are among the most stringent methods of Hadith collection.
The first hadith, can you provide a reference number in Bukhari (or the Arabic), I can find the narration in At Tirmidi but show where Al Albani says its daif (in Bukhari).
The second, the narration found in Al-Adab Al-Mufrad 1183 is found to be hassan by Al Albani himself, but the wording is different from the one in Musnad Ahmad, so what is your point, this was common practice of the Arabs when no water was nearby.
"...the penis of Hussein"
Is this reported by Bukhari or Muslim?
"ذكره ابن الجوزي في الموضوعات من طريق محمد بن مزيد بن أبي الأزهر ثنا علي بن مسلم الطوسي ثنا سعيد بن عامر عن قابوس بن أبي ظبيان عن أبيه عن جده عبد الله -وقال مرة عن أبيه عن جابر -قال رأيت رسول الله وهو يفحج ما بين فخذي الحسين ويقبل زبيبته ويقول لعن الله قاتلك فقلت يا رسول الله ومن قالته قال رجل من أمتي يبغض عشيرتي لا تناله شفاعتي"
Or this?
I'm not saying there's no such thing as a fabricated or weak hadith, but you have to be honest and take back your baseless claims that Bukhari and Muslim have fabricated Shia hadith. This does you no good to spread such a thing.
"I don't say all hadiths are fake and made up, but there are many scholars knocking off hadiths from early centuries of Islam to the last century, 20th century by Al-Albani."
They should know that Al-Albani himself spoke in high regard how sound the collections were, and he basically said time would befit him over analyzing them as they are authentic and spent it instead looking at other Hadith from other collections.