Defense attorney Emil Bove is scheduled to continue his cross-examination of former National Enquirer publisher David Pecker this morning, on Day 8 of former President Donald Trump's hush money trial.

On Thursday, under direct examination, Pecker detailed his publication's "catch-and-kill" deal with Trump, explaining how his publication paid Playboy model Karen McDougal $150,000 for the exclusive rights to her story about an alleged year-long relationship she had with Trump, then kept it under wraps so it wouldn't "embarrass Mr. Trump or embarrass or hurt the campaign."

Under cross-examination from Bove, Pecker testified that there was "nothing wrong" with those kind of arrangements, and that they were "standard operating procedure" for publications like his, listing several politicians -- including Rep. Rahm Emanuel and Arnold Schwarzenegger -- for whom he had caught and killed stories.

Former President Trump, exiting the courtroom at the end of Day 7 of his trial, called the day's court proceedings "breathtaking."

He specifically remarked on the Supreme Court's hearing this morning on his bid for presidential immunity in his federal election interference case, which Trump was forced to miss due to his criminal trial.

"I heard the meeting was quite amazing. The justices were on their game," Trump said.

-ABC News' Kelsey Walsh and Mike Pappano

Prosecutor Joshua Steinglass alleged that defense attorney Emil Bove used a "totally improper line of questioning" during Bove's cross-examination of former National Enquirer publisher David Pecker.

Judge Juan Mechan, addressing Bove, at one point raised his voice slightly, saying, "Are you missing my point? Because I don't think you are responding to what I am saying."

Merchan said that the jurors will be corrected about the alleged misimpression at the start of court tomorrow.

The judge then adjourned the day's proceedings, with court scheduled to resume at 9:30 a.m. ET Friday.

In his cross-examination of David Pecker, the former National Enquirer publisher who ran the publication's parent company, AMI, defense lawyer Emil Bove sought to draw a contrast between AMI's conduct with Donald Trump and its work with another celebrity-turned-politician: Arnold Schwarzenegger.

Earlier today, Pecker testified about an agreement with Schwarzenegger ahead of the actor's run for California governor. According to Pecker, Schwarzenegger agreed to serve as an editor-at-large for some of AMI's fitness magazines in exchange for help quashing negative stories about Schwarzenegger's past interactions with women.

"A number of women called up the National Enquirer about stories that they have to sell on different relationships or contacts and sexual harassment they felt that Arnold Schwarzenegger did," Pecker said. "The agreement I had with Arnold was I would call him and advise him of any stories that were out there."

Pecker described that his arrangement with Schwarzenegger -- which he said resulted in an "embarrassing" investigation into AMI's conduct -- provided him with some foundational experience when he began identifying and killing stories for Trump.

"That's how I became sensitive on this topic," Pecker.

Pressed on cross-examination about the arrangement with Schwarzenegger, Pecker acknowledged that AMI spent its own money to kill stories about the former California governor.

"It was hundreds of thousands of dollars," Pecker said.

"And Mr. Schwarzenegger never paid you back for that?" Bove asked.

"No, he didn't," Pecker said.

Pecker also testified about an effort to compel Tiger Woods to do an interview with AMI's fitness magazines by purchasing a negative story about him as leverage.

A prospective juror who went through questioning but was ultimately excused from the case told ABC News outside the courthouse that she didn't like the former president, but that it was important he get a fair trial.

"I don't like him, I don't approve of what he did as president," said Kara McGee, when asked by ABC News about her feelings on Trump. "But the right to a fair trial is extremely important. And if this would serve to uphold that, then that would be my priority."

McGee was excused from the case because of scheduling conflicts with her job.

"No matter what you think about someone as a person, or what other things they may have done, what he is on trial for is a very specific thing that even he deserves the right to a fair trial," she said.

Asked about the sentiment of the other prospective jurors on their opinions of Trump, McGee said it "seemed pretty even, surprisingly."

"I thought because this is Manhattan it might be a little bit more liberal, but there were a number of people who said 'Yes, I listen to Fox, I watch Fox, I have been on Trump mailing lists in the past,'" she said. "So not really leaning towards one side or the other, that I can tell."

"You got a sense that people were really trying to put anything that they had brought to this aside, and step in and do their civic duty," she said. "And that people really were being honest."