Donald Trump Jr. and his defense lawyers arrived at the New York State Supreme Courthouse this morning to be met with a small crowd of protestors chanting "crime family."

Trump Jr. did not make a statement before entering the courthouse, but offered a brief response to a question about his expected testimony.

Asked what he plans on saying today on the stand, he replied, "We'll see what I'm asked."

New York Attorney General Letitia James arrived at court shortly after Trump Jr. and took a seat in the courtroom with her staff.

Donald Trump Jr. took in some ultimate fighting ahead of his scheduled return to the witness stand this morning.

Trump Jr. attended a UFC doubleheader at Madison Square Garden on Saturday night with his father, in addition to Tucker Carlson, Kid Rock, and UFC president Dana White.

"I legitimately can't think of a better squad to roll with," Trump Jr. posted on social media.

Earlier that day while speaking at a campaign rally in New Hampshire, Donald Trump appeared to joke about appointing White to a position in a potential future administration.

"He's a guy I'd like to make my Defense Chief. I wouldn't call him my defense chief. I'd call him my 'Offense Chief.' He'd be my Offense Chief," Trump said.

As Trump's legal team prepares to begin presenting its case this morning, defense attorney Alina Habba says responsibility for the financial statements that the New York attorney general says are fraudulent lies with Trump's external accounting firm.

Previewing the defense's case during an appearance on Fox's Sunday Morning Futures with Maria Bartiromo, Habba also said the banks that loaned money to the Trump Organization were responsible for conducting their own due diligence regarding Trump's financial statements.

The state rested its case last week in the sixth week of the trial. The defense has said they expect their case to wrap up by Dec. 15.

Habba also suggested that Donald Trump plans to file a motion seeking a mistrial.

While Habba declined to comment on alleged misconduct by Judge Arthur Engoron's clerk -- which she is prohibited from doing due to the limited gag order handed down by the judge -- she said the issue would be addressed in their mistrial motion "very soon."

"I actually can't tell you why, because I am gagged. I can tell you that we will be filing papers to address all of those issues," Habba said.

However, Habba downplayed the chance the motion would be favorably decided Engoron.

"The problem we have is the judge is the one who is going to make those decisions, and he has proven himself to be quite motivated by the other side," Habba said.

In response to Rep. Elise Stefanik's letter of complaint against Judge Engoron that she filed Friday with the New York State Commission on Judicial Conduct, a spokesperson for New York State Office of Court Administration has issued a statement.

"Judge Engoron's actions and rulings in this matter are all part of the public record and speak for themselves," said Office of Court Administration communications director Al Baker. "It is inappropriate to comment further."

Judge Arthur Engoron's attorney argues in a new court filing that the willingness of Donald Trump's followers "to engage in violence to show their support" for Trump justifies the limited gag order in the former president's civil fraud trial.

Trump filed an Article 78 proceeding against Engoron earlier this month to remove the gag orders the judge imposed prohibiting him from commenting on the judge's staff, but a panel of judges vacated a temporary stay of the gag orders last week.

"It is undisputed that Mr. Trump has an inordinate ability to draw attention, fervor, and animosity to those he singles out for attention. Whether he seeks it or not, some of Mr. Trump's followers are willing to engage in violence to show their support," said Engoron's attorney Michael Suidzinski, an assistant deputy counsel with the New York State Office of Court Administration.

Engoron's attorney questioned Trump's need to speak about the judge's staff during the trial or his campaign, adding that the gag order still permits him to criticize Engoron, the attorney general, the case itself, witnesses, and the entire judicial process.

"It is unclear, however, how his ability to talk about Justice Engoron's court staff is necessary for his campaign when this country faces a number of issues more worthy of debate," Suidzinski wrote.

"Given the real and demonstrated likelihood of harm that could come to Justice Engoron's court staff if the gag orders were annulled, Justice Engoron's legitimate and justifiable interest in preventing such harm greatly outweighs the de minimis interference to Mr. Trump's rights," Suidzinski wrote.