The aggressive use of wiretaps is important: It shows that we are targeting white-collar insider-trading rings with the same powerful investigative tools that have worked so successfully against the mob and drug cartels.

I would like to think that the level of aggressiveness in law enforcement will remain the same, when you're talking about things like keeping the markets fair and government honest. I don't foresee any departure from that, unless I'm missing something big.

Businesses should be assured that law enforcement will operate with the utmost sensitivity toward victims of cyber attacks.

The alarm bells sound regularly: cybergeddon; the next Pearl Harbor; one of the greatest existential threats facing the United States. With increasing frequency, these are the grave terms officials invoke about the menace of cybercrime - and they're not understating the threat.

I eat almost no lunch. I have a big dinner but I don't have a big lunch.

That's an incredibly serious thing if people think that the president of the United States can tell heads of law enforcement agencies, based on his own whim or his own personal preferences or friendships, that they should or should not pursue particular criminal cases against individuals. That's not how America works.

Securities fraud generally and insider trading in particular should be eminently deterrable crimes.