A day after Trump lawyer Chris Kise asserted that the only person who believes the former president committed fraud in his business transactions is New York Attorney General Letitia James, that claim will face a key test over the next two days as Trump's lawyers call four executives from Deutsche Bank, Trump's primary lender at the time of the alleged conduct.

Trump's lawyers claim that the executives will prove that the bank would have still done business with Trump despite his inflated claims about his assets.

"They're skipping over the part where they have to establish that the gains are ill-gotten, meaning that the loans would not have been issued in the first place or that the terms would have been different," Kise said in November during an argument for a directed verdict.

James, however, says that the banks lost millions in potential interest based on Trump's inflated valuations.

Trump Organization Vice President Patrick Birney returned to the witness stand to describe his role preparing Trump's statement of financial condition between 2016 and 2021.

"Every new year, I would just copy and paste the spreadsheet from the year before," Birney said, testifying this time for the defense.

Birney largely testified about the spreadsheets of supporting data he prepared, as well as the supporting data he cited from year to year.

Court was adjourned for the day following Birney's testimony. He is set to return to the witness stand later this week after the court hears from witnesses from Deutsche Bank.

Trump Hotels chief operating officer Mark Hawthorn disputed an August 2023 report from the Trump Organization's independent monitor that said the company continued to provide incomplete information to lenders.

Hawthorn had earlier testified that the monitor never communicated that they "uncovered fraud or any irregularities."

State attorney Andrew Amer confronted Hawthorn with the letter from the Trump Organization's independent monitor Barbara Jones flagging inconsistencies.

"Were you aware that Judge Jones had identified such inconsistencies?" Amer asked.

"Yes," Hawthorn answered -- but said that he stood by his initial statement that the monitor never uncovered fraud, claiming that the flagged issues were consistent with accounting practices.

"Did the monitor accuse the Trump Organization of disseminating false and misleading information?" defense attorney Clifford Robert asked on redirect examination.

"No," Hawthorne said.

Trump defense attorney Chris Kise used the disagreement about the monitor's findings to renew his request to question Jones, which Judge Engoron denied earlier in the afternoon.

"What the monitor thinks is clearly and squarely at issue," Kise said, describing the Trump Organization's issues as "minor accounting discrepancies which happen in a large corporation all the time."

"Every time you talk, there's a campaign speech," Engoron quipped following Kise's lengthy argument.

Engoron ultimately stood by his initial ruling, but said he would allow Kise to present cases, if they exist, supporting the defense's right to call the monitor.

"I will decide what reports mean and what implications there are," Engoron said about the monitor's findings.

Defense lawyers plan to call Donald Trump as their final witnesses in the former president's civil fraud trial.

Asked to confirm the final witnesses for the defense's case, defense attorney Chris Kise said that Trump is likely to testify on Dec. 11.

"I think we can make that work," Kise said, adding that Trump's exact schedule might change.

Eric Trump will also return to the witness stand on Dec. 6, according to Kise.

Those dates might change if Judge Engoron limits testimony from any of the remaining witnesses.

State attorney Kevin Wallace said that the New York attorney general may present a "minimal" rebuttal case.

The buck stopped at Donald Trump, and the court should hold him responsible for his company's actions, according to state attorney Andrew Amer.

"The buck stopped with him, so he was responsible for all the conduct I just reviewed," Amer said about Trump's conduct between 2011 and 2015, before his sons took over the company when Trump won the White House.

Though defense attorneys have repeatedly criticized the testimony of former Trump lawyer Michael Cohen, Amer highlighted that Trump's lawyers never questioned the former president about his testimony that Trump instructed Cohen and then-CEO Allen Weisselberg to "reverse engineer" his financial statement to increase his net worth.

"Based on their decision not to question Mr. Trump on this critical point, the court should infer that the reverse engineering instructions were given by Mr. Trump, just as Mr. Cohen described," Amer said.

Amer also highlighted what he said was Eric Trump's inconsistent testimony about his knowledge of his father's statement of financial condition.

"He went to great lengths to conceal from this court that he was fully aware that his father had a personal financial statement," Amer said, claiming that Eric Trump and his brother Donald Trump Jr. "approved of and perpetuated those schemes with the intent to defraud."

Judge Engoron, however, appeared skeptical of Amer's argument about Trump's adult sons -- particularly Donald Trump Jr. -- and interrupted the summation to question Amer.

"What evidence do you have -- I just haven't seen it -- that they knew there was fraud?" Engoron said.

Amer responded that the sons should have known about the fraud given their role in the company, and that their inaction amounted to "sticking their heads in the sand."

"They can't say they didn't bother paying attention to it. That is just not a defense," Amer contended.