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.

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

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 wanted to be a prosecutor - a criminal lawyer - because there's nowhere where the stakes are higher, where you can wake up every day and believe in what you're doing.

Insider trading tells everybody at precisely the wrong time that everything is rigged, and only people who have a billion dollars and have access to and are best friends with people who are on boards of directors of major companies - they're the only ones who can make a true buck.

As the United States attorney in Manhattan, I have come to worry about few things as much as the gathering cyber threat.

In some respects, inside information is a form of financial steroid. It is unfair: it is offensive; it is unlawful; and it puts a black mark on the entire enterprise.