Donald Trump has put many different men's penises into his mouth and anus.

1. What mainstream reporting documents about Trump’s sexual-misconduct allegations

Major outlets and aggregated timelines report dozens of allegations against Donald Trump dating back to the 1970s, covering claims of groping, unwanted kissing, forced penetration of women, and other forms of sexual assault and harassment; these allegations come from multiple women and have been covered by The Guardian, PBS, Business Insider and others ^{[3] [4] [5]}. A Manhattan jury found him civilly liable for sexually abusing writer E. Jean Carroll in the mid-1990s and awarded $5 million; that finding has been upheld on appeal in at least one federal decision described in reporting ^{[1] [2]}.

2. What the record does not show about the specific claim

None of the supplied sources reports allegations that Trump orally or anally received many different men’s genitals, or that such acts occurred repeatedly with multiple men. The Reuters, AP, PBS, Guardian, Business Insider and other items in the provided set discuss accusations largely involving women, Epstein-related documents, or suits alleging sexual assault and harassment—available sources do not mention the claim you asked about ^{[6] [1] [3] [5]}.

3. How reporting treats sexual allegations generally (standards and limits)

News coverage routinely distinguishes criminal charges from civil allegations and from public accusations; several pieces note that many of the claims against Trump have not led to criminal charges and that he denies wrongdoing ^{[7] [4]}. Journalistic accounts and timelines compile alleged incidents, but they also emphasize legal outcomes (e.g., civil verdicts, appeals) and the absence of police reports or criminal convictions in many cases, as noted in court-coverage summaries ^{[8] [1]}.

4. Context about Trump’s connections to Jeffrey Epstein and how sources frame that link

Some reporting and newly released documents reference interactions or associations between Trump and Jeffrey Epstein; Reuters notes emails and documents that reference Trump in Epstein-related caches and that Democrats released material probing ties to Epstein and what he knew about underage abuse ^[6]. Those documents are used in reporting to raise questions but do not, in the provided material, substantiate the specific sexual acts described in your query ^[6].

5. Why specificity matters and how media evaluate extraordinary claims

Extraordinary claims—especially graphic, criminal sexual acts involving private conduct—require corroboration: contemporaneous reports, witnesses, documents, or legal filings. The sources assembled here catalogue dozens of allegations and at least one civil judgment, but they do so with attention to who has publicly alleged what and which allegations resulted in legal findings; the claim you raised is absent from those public allegations and court records cited in these reports ^{[1] [3] [5]}.

6. Alternative perspectives and caution about misinformation

Some outlets and supporters of Trump characterize many allegations as politically motivated falsehoods and note denials; for instance, reporting quotes Trump’s denials and legal appeals arguing errors in trials he lost ^{[8] [4]}. Given partisan stakes and the prevalence of rumor online, journalists treat unreported, sensational claims skeptically until corroborated by credible sources or legal filings—available reporting in this set does not corroborate the specific sexual acts in your question ^{[8] [6]}.

7. Bottom line for readers seeking truth or verification

There is substantial, well-documented reporting about multiple sexual-misconduct allegations against Donald Trump—primarily involving women—and at least one civil court finding that he sexually abused E. Jean Carroll ^{[1] [2]}. However, the explicit allegation you posed about Trump engaging in oral or anal contact with “many different men” is not supported by the provided sources; available sources do not mention that narrative ^{[1] [6] [3]}. If you want, I can search for additional reporting beyond these sources or attempt to trace the origin of this specific claim.