"As a threshold matter, Mr. Blanche, I agree that there are some things that would be better left unsaid," Judge Merchan told defense attorney Todd Blanche in denying the defense's motion for a mistrial based on Stormy Daniels' testimony.

"The witness was a little difficult to control. Having said that, I do think there were guardrails in place ... certain details that I don't think we needed to get into," the judge said.

"Whether these are new stories or not new stories, the remedy is on cross-examination. So I'm going to deny your motion for a mistrial at this time," Merchan said.

"I was surprised that there were not more objections" from the defense team, the judge added.

"At one point, the court ... objected, because there was no objection coming from the defense," he said.

Prosecutor Susan Hoffinger pushed back on the defense's request for a mistrial, arguing Daniels' testimony was consistent and permissible.

"This story -- her account -- is highly probative of the defendant's intent," she said. "This is not new. This is not a new account."

"They opened the door to this," she said. Her testimony was necessary for prosecutors "to rehabilitate credibility where they attacked it" in their opening statement.

Hoffinger defended her direct examination, telling Merchan she dialed back the testimony at his request.

"We were extremely mindful of not eliciting too much testimony about the actual act," Hoffinger said.

Blanche fired back, telling Merchan that the testimony from Daniels was a harmful distraction.

"I don't think anybody can listen to what that witness said and think it had anything to do with the charged conduct," he said. "You run a very high risk of the jury not being able to focus on the evidence that really does matter."

"I don't believe we are at the point where a mistrial is warranted," Merchan said.

Trump's defense team has moved for a mistrial over Stormy Daniels' testimony

"We move for a mistrial based on the testimony this morning," defense attorney Todd Blanche said following the lunch break.

"The guardrails by this witness answering questions by the government were just thrown to the side," Blanche said.

"There is no remedy that we can fashion ... to unring this bell," Blanche said about the impact of Daniels' testimony.

Blanche argued the prosecutors wanted to embarrass Trump and inflame the jury and was far afield from a case about falsification of business records.

"She talked about a consensual encounter with President Trump that she was trying to sell," Blanche said. "We heard a completely different story."

Blanche argued that the testimony regarding condoms, being "blacked out" and and the "power dynamic" prejudiced the jury.

"This has nothing to do with the reason why we're here," Blanche said. "How can you un-ring a bell?"

The prosecution pushed back.

"Her account completes the narrative that precipitated the falsification of business records," Hoffinger said. "It is precisely what the defendant did not want to become public."

Stormy Daniels testified that she initially authorized her agent Gina Rodriguez to shop around her story in 2016.

"My motivation wasn't money," Daniels said. "It was to get the story out."

But then, after the infamous "Access Hollywood" tape came out, she learned that then-Trump attorney Michael Cohen was interested in purchasing her story -- by way of a settlement or nondisclosure agreement -- "which was the best thing that could've happened ... because then I'd be safe and the story wouldn't come out," Daniels testified.

"It was motivated out of fear, not money," Daniels said, adding that her financial situation at the time was the "best it's ever been."

"Why didn't you ask for more money?" Hoffinger asked about Michael Cohen's $130,000 offer.

"Because I didn't care about the money," Daniels said.

Daniels, on the witness stand, then reviewed the contract she signed to sell her story in exchange for her silence.

Asked if she signed it, she said, "Yes."

But Daniels affirmed earlier testimony that she wasn't paid the money on time.

"No, it was late. I didn't know why it was late, he just kept making excuses," she said of Cohen.

Daniels said she became concerned when Cohen delayed the payment, and she worried that if she didn't get the payment before the election, she might never get it -- "because he (Trump) had gotten what he wanted and it goes all the way back to me not being safe," she said.

Asked what she understood the payment arrangement to be, she answered, "Trump to Cohen, Cohen to Davidson," referring to then-attorney Keith Davidson.

Court subsequently recessed for lunch, with Daniels scheduled to return to the stand after the break.