'Painful but necessary': Expert says  Trump trial closing arguments had to be thorough

Closing arguments in former President Donald Trump's criminal hush money trial may have stunned some experts with their extreme length, but legal expert Norm Eisen said there was no other way for the prosecution to do it.

Eisen appeared on CNN Tuesday night as Manhattan District Attorney's office prosecutor Joshua Steinglass wrapped his falsifying business records case with an hours-long recount of the evidence presented against Trump.

"It felt like they reviewed all 200-plus exhibits," Eisen said. "It was painful... but I thought that was necessary."

ALSO READ: 'Oh, come on!' Tommy Tuberville dismisses Trump connection to 'unified Reich' video

Eisen suggested the prosecution was prudent not to weigh in on each element in their quest to shoulder the burden of proof.

"If the jury says, 'I'll stay till 8:00 [p.m.] — you argue until 7 or 7:59," said Eisen. "And the weight, the overwhelming weight of the evidence — that was the prosecution's approach."

Trump has pleaded not guilty to charges that he fudged business records to cover up hush money payments ahead of the 2016 presidential election.

In his closing, Trump's attorney Todd Blanche detailed his own lengthy argument against the prosecution's case, Eisen noted.

"The defense honed in on the three critical issues in this case," Eisen said.

ALSO READ: What Trump's weird WWE Hall of Fame speech tells us about his presidential debate strategy

As Eisen summarized it, Blanche argued the District Attorney's office had not proved the business records were falsified, that Trump intended fraud, or that he was involved in an election conspiracy coverup.

"They used an inductive approach," Eisen said. "The prosecution took the exact opposite approach."

Eisen also noted that as Steinglass recreated his timeline for Trump's alleged crimes, the jury appeared to "hang in there."

Watch the video below or click here.