Judge Arthur Engoron has denied Donald Trump's most recent motion for a directed verdict to end his civil fraud trial.

In a blistering ruling, the judge not only denied the motion but also opted to explain the flaws he sees in many of Trump's arguments at trial.

Addressing the testimony of defense accounting expert Eli Bartov, who Trump proudly and repeatedly declared found "no accounting fraud of any kind," Engoron flatly dismissed Bartov's findings by saying he lost credibility by "doggedly attempting to justify every misstatement."

"Bartov is a tenured professor, but all that his testimony proves is that for a million or so dollars, some experts will say whatever you want them to say," Engoron wrote.

The judge also rejected assertions from Trump's lawyers that any financial misstatements are beyond the case's statute of limitations.

"Closing is not a get-out-of-jail-free card for future misstatements. All that §63(12) requires is a false statement used in business; the subject financial statements fit that definition 'to a T,'" Engoron wrote.

Engoron also suggested he didn't buy Trump's argument that fining the former president for ill-gotten gains was not merited in the case because his lenders were happy with the transactions.

"That the instant lenders made millions of dollars and were happy with the transactions does not mean that they were not damaged by lending at lower interest rates than they otherwise would have," he wrote.

Calling Trump's claims "misstatements at best and fraud at worst," Engoron wrote that "Valuations, as elucidated ad nauseum in this trial, can be based on different criteria analyzed in different ways. But a lie is still a lie."

The judge ended his ruling by reminding the parties about the date for closing arguments in the case, currently set for Jan. 11.

In a letter the Judge Arthur Engoron, a lawyer for the New York attorney general said Donald Trump's most recent request for a directed verdict in the case is nothing more than a "political stunt designed to provide Mr. Trump, his co-defendants, and their counsel with sound bites for press conferences, Truth Social posts, and cable news appearances."

Trump's lawyers on Friday made their fifth motion for a directed verdict to end the case for lack of evidence, which Engoron earlier said he was all but certain to deny. The judge has rejected all four of Trump's previous motions for a directed verdict.

"Unlike a fine Bordeaux, Defendants' case for a directed verdict does not improve with age," state attorney Andrew Amer wrote in Monday's letter to the judge.

Amer also argued that Trump's request was not merited given the evidence presented at trial, saying that "Nor does any of the testimony from the most ineffective team of experts that Defendants' money can buy change the analysis."

"Defendants are once again 'whistling past the graveyard' by relying on arguments the Court has already rejected," Amer said, referring in part to Engoron's pretrial partial summary judgment ruling, in which he found that Trump used fraudulent statements to conduct business.

Donald Trump's lawyers made their fifth motion for a directed verdict in the former president's fraud trial in a filing late Friday that appears destined to be rejected.

Judge Arthur Engoron all but guaranteed he would deny the request to end the trial when Trump's lawyer Chris Kise announced his plans to file the motion earlier this week.

"There is no way I am going to grant that," Engoron said on Tuesday. "You'd be wasting your time."

Trump's lawyers nevertheless filed their motion late Friday.

"In sum, there was no fraud, there were no victims, there has simply been no harm or actionable misconduct, and the Court must and should follow the law of the case regarding the scope of the claims at issue," Trump's lawyers wrote.

In the filing, Trump's attorneys targeted New York Attorney General Letitia James' request to fine Trump nearly $400 million for ill-gotten gains by arguing that the state failed to demonstrate that Trump and his sons intended to defraud his lenders or that they engaged in a conspiracy to commit fraud.

"Not a single defense witness supported the notion of any alleged conspiracy, and in fact such testimony refuted fully the existence of the same," the lawyers wrote, calling Trump's former lawyer Michael Cohen, who testified about the alleged conspiracy, a "demonstrable, perpetual, and serial liar."

They also argued that James failed to prove that any of Trump's alleged misrepresentations would have materially changed the loans he received from his lenders, writing that the alleged misstatements had "no actual significance" to Trump's lenders.

All four of Trump's previous motions for a directed verdict to end the case for lack of evidence have been rejected by Judge Engoron.

Donald Trump wants New York's highest court to weigh in on the limited gag order in his civil fraud trial, according to a new filing Friday afternoon.

New York's Appellate Division shot down Trump's earlier challenge Thursday, determining that Trump used the incorrect legal avenue to challenge the limited gag order, which bars him from commenting on Judge Arthur Engoron's staff.

In a notice of appeal filed Friday, Trump's lawyers said they plan to appeal the decision to the Albany-based Court of Appeals -- New York's highest court.

It's unclear if the Court of Appeals will consider the request because Trump also lost a motion for leave to appeal the gag order.

Donald Trump has lost his appeal to throw out the limited gag orders and associated fines in his civil fraud trial.

In a decision Thursday, New York's Appellate Division, First Department rejected Trump's request to annul and vacate the limited gag orders imposed by Judge Arthur Engoron that prohibit Trump and attorneys from commenting on the judge's staff.

In November, Trump's lawyers asked the Appellate Division to vacate the gag orders, citing a provision of New York state law to personally sue Judge Engoron. But the court said in today's ruling that the method used to appeal the gag orders was an improper application of the law.

"To the extent there may have been appealable issues with respect to any of the procedures the court implemented in imposing the financial sanctions, the proper method of review would be to move to vacate the Contempt Orders, and then to take an appeal from the denial of those motions," the ruling said, indicating that Trump should use the normal appellate process to pursue the vacating of the gag orders.

The court also determined that the "extraordinary remedy" requested by Trump's lawyers did not match the minimal potential harm from barring statements about Engoron's staff.

"Here, the gravity of potential harm is small, given that the Gag Order is narrow, limited to prohibiting solely statements regarding the court's staff," the decision said.