Former President Donald Trump reiterated his plans to testify in his criminal trial as he exited the courtroom at the end of the day.

"We just had another hearing and the trial starts on Monday, which is long before a lot of people thought," Trump said. "The judge wants to go as fast as possible."

The former president again, without evidence, called the trial a witch hunt orchestrated by his political rivals.

-Mike Pappano

Judge Juan Merchan declined to order prosecutors to disclose their first witness after defense attorneys remade a request from yesterday.

"I still think that under the circumstances, the people's response is understandable, and I am not going to compel them to do anything," Merchan said, citing the hearing set for Tuesday to hold Trump in contempt for violating the judge's limited gag order.

Yesterday, prosecutors expressed concern that Trump might attack the initial witnesses if he learned their names. Today, prosecutor Joshua Steinglass offered a compromise -- that they would turn over the first witnesses name on Sunday with a strict condition.

"If that should be tweeted, that will be the last time we extend that courtesy," Steinglass said.

Steinglass said that while the testimony of the first witness will likely begin on Monday, it is unlikely the witness finishes their direct examination by the end of the day.

Court was subsequently recessed for the day.

An appeals court judge has denied the defense's request for an emergency stay of the trial.

Trump earlier Friday filed the emergency appeal as he sought to change the venue of the trial based on some of the responses prospective jurors gave during the jury selection process.

The appeals court judge denied Trump's request to delay the start of the trial.

Trump's prior attempts to move the trial out of Manhattan have failed.

"We're going to have opening statements on Monday morning," Judge Juan Merchan declared.

He made the pronouncement after admonishing the defense to stop filing letters "targeting individual decisions one by one by one."

"There comes a point where you accept my rulings," he told Trump and his defense team.

"I've entertained your motions. I've entertained your arguments," Merchan said. "There's nothing else to clarify. There is nothing else to argue. We are going to have opening statements on Monday. We are starting on Monday."

Former National Enquirer publisher David Pecker testified on cross-examination that the publication's limited involvement in Stormy Daniels' hush money payment was unrelated to the August 2015 Trump Tower meeting where Pecker vowed to serve as the "eyes and ears" of Trump's presidential campaign.

Pecker's testimony on cross-examination about the Daniels story appeared consistent with his testimony yesterday about his strong desire not to be involved in the Stormy Daniels payment.

Pecker said yesterday that he did not want to be involved in the story due to concerns about reputational harm to the National Enquirer and a lack of reimbursement for the other payments he had made to suppress previous Trump stories.

"I said, we already paid $30,000 to the doorman, we paid $150,000 to Karen McDougal, and I am not a bank. I am not paying out any further disbursements among us," Pecker testified yesterday. Pecker said he instructed National Enquirer Chief Content Officer Dylan Howard to flag the Stormy Daniels story to Michael Cohen, who made the payment to Daniels himself.

Asked about Daniels' payment on cross-examination, Pecker said that the National Enquirer's limited involvement was unrelated to their vow to Trump.

"You did not consider the Stormy Daniels story to be part of any agreement you had in August 2015?" defense attorney Emil Bove asked.

"That is correct," Pecker said.

"You wanted nothing to do with it?" Bove said.

"That's correct," Pecker said.

Pecker added that he did not "authorize" Howard to continue communicating with Stormy Daniels' lawyer Keith Davidson about the payment.

When Howard raised concerns to Pecker that Davidson had not yet been paid by Michael Cohen, Pecker said he was angry that Howard continued to communicate with Davidson about the story. In addition to the nature of the story -- which Pecker said could endanger the National Enquirer's relationship with its distributors -- Pecker said Cohen's delay in paying Daniels' lawyer could result in reputational harm to the National Enquirer.

"Frankly, you were not happy to be hearing that?" Bove asked about Cohen's delayed payment.

"Yes," Pecker said.

"The main concern was Howard's reputation?" Bove asked.

"Yes," Pecker said.