New York Attorney General Letitia James has requested a Dec. 8 deadline to respond to what she called the "spurious allegations" in Donald Trump's motion for a mistrial, a day after Trump sought a mistrial claiming bias on the part of Judge Arthur Engoron and his clerk.

If granted, the request would delay any decision on the mistrial motion until later in the trial and likely push any potential appeal until after the trial has concluded.

State attorney Kevin Wallace cited the "considerable daily attention" of the trial and the impending Thanksgiving holiday as reasons for the extended deadline.

"The Office of the Attorney General's position is that -- putting aside the total lack of merit to Defendants' application for a mistrial -- it is preferable to have the Court hear and decide the application on full briefing," Wallace wrote.

State attorney Kevin Wallace, cross-examining defense expert Jason Flemmons, attempted to challenge Flemmons' testimony by pressing the accountant on his experience with personal financial statements and his work reviewing Trump's statements.

Flemmons testified that he himself had compiled fewer than five statements of financial condition, none of which were done after 2000. He also acknowledged that he did not review each of Trump's financial statements between 2011 and 2021, which are the subject of the New York attorney general's complaint.

Flemmons generally underplayed the importance of the financial statements by suggesting that most issues Wallace raised were "easily curable with a phone call."

Asked if he could provide a specific example where he was involved in such a follow-up inquiry, Flemmons failed to offer an example and instead generally referred to his time working for the Securities and Exchange Commission.

Court was subsequently adjourned for the day, with Wallace scheduled to continue his testimony tomorrow morning.

The defense's accounting expert could not identify any departures from generally accepted accounting principles -- known as GAAP -- in Donald Trump's statements of financial condition that were not disclosed, according to his testimony.

"I don't believe I have identified any additional discrepancies with GAAP that were not covered by those disclosures," Jason Flemmons testified toward the end of his direct examination.

Flemmons also testified that the statements appropriately cited their use of appraisals, challenging the state's assertion that Trump ignored vital appraisal information.

"Was the use of appraisals accurately described in the statements?" defense attorney Jesus Suarez asked.

"I believe so. I don't believe there was anything that contradicted the use of appraisals but also other bases for evaluating the properties," Flemmons responded.

Suarez concluded his lengthy direct examination, setting up state attorney Kevin Wallace's cross-examination of Flemmons.

After Jason Flemmons, the defense’s expert accounting witness, had testified at length about how Donald Trump's financial statements included adequate disclaimers to explain his departure from normal accounting standards, Judge Engoron interjected to push back on the testimony.

That prompted Flemmons to confirm he is attesting largely to the general accounting methods used by the Trump Organization -- not the specific numbers they provided for each of their assets.

As Flemmons gets further into his second day on the stand, Judge Engoron's initial enthusiasm regarding his testimony appears to be on the wane, with the judge sustaining more of the state’s objections and asking increasingly skeptical questions.

State attorney Kevin Wallace concluded his direct examination of the New York attorney general's second and final rebuttal witness amid frequent objections by defense lawyers.

Lewis attempted to explain how Donald Trump's statements of financial condition failed to disclose that he did not conduct a discounted cash flow analysis, contributing to the over-valuation of some of his assets.

"There is no mention of discounting or future value in the disclosure," Lewis said, disagreeing with testimony from defense expert Jason Flemmons -- as well as former Mazars USA accountant Donald Bender, who testified as a state witness.

“Are you impeaching your own witness?” Engoron asked state attorneys regarding whether Bender’s testimony should no longer be considered credible.

"We didn't feel the need to," Wallace responded.

Lewis also suggested that Trump's external accountants at Mazars had less of an obligation to highlight issues that Flemmons suggested, since they were only conducting a compilation report rather than a more intensive audit. While Mazars had an obligation to flag obvious issues, they were not responsible for ensuring Trump's statements were compliant with generally accepted accounting principles, he testified.

"If while doing the compilation ... something comes to the attention of the accounts that could be a GAAP departure, they have a responsibility to bring that issue to the client," Lewis said regarding generally accepted accounting principles.

During the hour-long direct examination, defense lawyers objected at least 14 times, successfully interrupting the line of questions.

"I am lost," Engoron asked at one point. "Can you put this together?"

The parade of objections visibly irritating Wallace, who voiced his displeasure.

"Petulant outbursts don't really play well in the courtroom," quipped Trump lawyer Chris Kise in response.