State attorney Louis Solomon grew visibly frustrated with Ivanka Trump's limited recollections during an exchange about Donald Trump's Old Post Office building in Washington, D.C.

Solomon attempted to confront Ivanka Trump with a document that showed that the General Services Administration -- which ran the selection process for the renovation of the building -- raised concerns about Donald Trump's financial statements in 2011. New York Attorney General Letitia James, who says the statements contained fraudulent valuations, alleges that both Donald Trump and Ivanka Trump addressed those concerns during an in-person meeting with GSA officials.

"It was a general presentation. I don't recall with specificity any discussion of financial statements," Ivanka Trump said, prompting Solomon to throw his hands in the air.

"When I ask a question, she doesn't remember," an exasperated Solomon said. "The witness does have a recollection, your honor!"

"Would you like to clarify the situation?" Judge Engoron directly asked Ivanka Trump, who repeated the same description of the meeting.

"I recall one in-person meeting" about the "big picture" of the project, Ivanka Trump testified. She said recalled no discussion of "financial statements or anything granular like that."

Donald Trump's lawyers, meanwhile, have continued to object to Solomon asking questions about conduct from over a decade ago, which they say is akin to ancient history for a fast-moving real estate company.

"The GSA decision was made years before the statute of limitations," Donald Trump's lawyer Chris Kise argued, though Engoron overruled the objection.

Donald Trump is not in court today, but his lawyer is beginning to sound like the former president, according to a quip from Judge Arthur Engoron.

Describing the Trump Organization's renovation of the Old Post Office building in Washington, D.C., Trump's lawyer Chris Kise argued that the building was transformed from a "hulking relic" into a "world-class facility."

"You are starting to sound like your client," Engoron said, prompting some laughs from the gallery.

Ivanka Trump was removed from the courtroom for ten minutes while attorneys argued over whether the statute of limitations applied to the deals discussed during her testimony.

"These deals ... had requirements for updated financials year, after year, after year," Judge Arthur Engoron said. "To me, they are very much part of this case."

Donald Trump's lawyer argued that Ivanka Trump's conduct between 2011 and 2013 could not impact someone else recertifying the loans years later.

"It's theoretically impossible -- it's beyond implausible that some event that took place in 2016 would have changed the course of events in 2011, 2012, and 2013," Trump attorney Chris Kise said.

Judge Engoron appeared unconvinced by the arguments and allowed the testimony to continue.

"The ship has sailed," Engoron said.

Asked about her involvement in her father's statements of financial condition that the judge has already determined fraudulently overvalued his real estate and inflated his net worth, Ivaka Trump said she had no knowledge of them.

"I would assume he had a personal financial statement," Ivanka Trump said. "Those weren't things that I was privy to."

Regarding a lease she had for a penthouse apartment in Trump Park Avenue that included an option to buy for $8.5 million, the New York attorney general's office said Trump's statement financial condition claimed that units in the building were selling for $20.8 million -- two and a half times as much.

Asked by state lawyer Louis Solomon whether she knew about that discrepancy, Ivanka Trump responded, "I wasn't involved in his statement of financial condition so I can't say what it took into account or didn't take into account."

Solomon pressed her about the documents, asking, "Did you know whether he had personal financial statements, Donald J. Trump?" Solomon asked.

"I'm not involved in his personal financial statements. I didn't know about his personal statements, per se, other than what you've showed me," Ivanka Trump responded.

"Did you have any role in preparing Donald J. Trump's statements of financial condition?"

"Not that I'm aware of," she replied.

The second day of testimony from the defense's expert accounting witness prompted an argument between attorneys for the two sides over the basic question of what the case is about -- leading defense lawyers to make their fourth unsuccessful request for a directed verdict to end the trial.

The arguments came toward the end of direct testimony by accounting expert defense Eli Bartov, who asserted the New York attorney general's case lacked merit because there was no evidence of any fraud on Trump's statements of financial condition, and that any errors about the values of Trump's properties were unintentional and therefore immaterial.

When the defense attempted to question Bartov about those values, state attorneys objected -- prompting defense attorney Christopher Kise to leap from his seat.

"If they don't call anyone to dispute our values, how have they proven their case?" Kise said.

Judge Arthur Engoron, in a pretrial ruling, already decided that Trump conducted a decade's worth of business using fraudulent financial statements, and state attorney Kevin Wallace suggested that Bartov's findings do not change those findings.

"You can't use false statements in business. That's what the summary judgment decision is all about. I think it is pretty much what the rest of this case is about," Engoron said in response to Kise's question.

Kise argued that if the attorney general doesn't prove what Trump's asset values should have been, the case is a "completely rudderless ship" that needs to be "moored to some sort of standard."

"You can't just say it's a misstatement because you feel like it," Kise argued.

"The standard is truth," Engoron responded.

The exchange prompted Trump's legal spokesperson, Alina Habba, to make the defense's fourth motion for a directed verdict, arguing that Engoron is "wasting our time" if he won't consider their expert testimony.

"They have not proven their case. They haven't," Habba said in her request for a directed verdict.

"Denied," Engoron said within seconds of the request, without hearing a response from lawyers for the New York attorney general.