A pair of legal experts weighed in on how former President Trump's court testimony may have affected his case in New York.
Trump testified in his non-jury civil trial on Monday stemming from New York Attorney General Leticia James' lawsuit against him and his Empire State businesses.
The former president exchanged fire with Judge Arthur Engoron while being questioned by Kevin Wallace, a lawyer from the New York Attorney General's Office.
George Washington University law professor Jonathan Turley told Fox News Digital that watching "Trump being called for testimony is like waiting for the green flag at NASCAR" in that many "are coming for the car crashes."
"There was an obvious disconnect in the testimony," Turley said. "Trump seemed to be speaking to the public, but neither a jury nor a television camera was present. Instead, he was technically speaking to a judge who repeatedly expressed frustration with the tenor and length of the answers."
Turley said that the "fact is that these cases have only increased Trump's popularity" and that with "every indictment, he seems to gain five percentage points."
"At this rate, with four more indictments, he could be elected by general acclamation," Turley said. "The problem for Trump is the underlying law. The New York law does not require an actual victim or even loss of money."
"That law became an easy vehicle for James to fulfill her pledge to bag Trump if elected," Turley continued, referencing the New York attorney general's campaign promise to take legal action against the former president.
"There are two cases being made in that courtroom. James is making the case to bar Trump from business in New York while Trump is making the case for reelection," he continued.
"Both may be succeeding," he added. "James seems to have a sympathetic court while Trump seems to have an increasingly sympathetic public."
Attorney and conservative commentator Andy McCarthy told Fox News Digital he does not think the former president's testimony will help or hurt his case because it "has already been decided."
"The judge and state’s attorney general are elected Democrats," McCarthy said. "The AG ran vowing to use the power of her office against Trump."
"The judge told Trump before the trial even started that he had already lost the case and all the trial was going to be about was how much he was going to have to pay ($250M or more) in addition to being put out of business in [New York]," McCarthy continued.
"The judge is going to do what he’s going to do regardless of Trump’s testimony," he added.
The civil trial stems from James’ lawsuit against Trump, his family and his businesses. James alleged that Trump defrauded banks and inflated the value of his assets.
Trump has denied any wrongdoing and has repeatedly said his assets were actually undervalued. Trump has repeatedly said his financial statements had disclaimers, requesting that the numbers be evaluated by the banks.
After a break in his testimony, Trump again took the stand, defending himself and his businesses and blasting the investigation.
"We shouldn’t be having a case here because we have a disclaimer clause that every court holds up except this judge," Trump said, referring to the disclaimers on all of his financial statements and statements of financial condition.
"They're trying to hurt me – especially her," Trump said, referring to James, "for political reasons."
Trump went on to call James a "political hack," saying she used her investigation and lawsuit against him "to become governor, to become attorney general." The former president was referring to James’ campaigns in which she vowed to "get Trump."
Fox News Digital's Brooke Singman and Maria Paronich contributed reporting.